Group executive accountability bill passed with continuing debate over SAFB accountability

And for the third straight week, debate ensued over the group executive accountability bill. Where once the original bill showed divisions between Executive Vice President Matt Bogusz and members of his executive committee, the revised bill showed divisions between the Senate, including the executive committee, and the Student Activities Finance Board. This has been a contentious topic making its way through three Associated Student Government Senate meetings thus far. Though the body passed a bill to mandate student group reviews of group executives, it will likely reappear on the Senate floor, revised to increase accountability of SAFB's group account executives.

At the end of the night, the original bill presented to Senate — only to create group executive accountability — was passed. Another vote was taken in order to permanently write the bill's protocol into ASG guidelines instead of having the bill take effect for only two years, as all ASG bills do. A two-thirds majority is needed to change ASG guidelines.

A proposed legislative order by Will Upton to require SAFB to similar accountability rules failed to meet a two-thirds majority, with only 58 percent of Senate for the order. Upton suggested SAFB use the same bill, revised in ways to fit the board, such as changing the questions student group leaders would answer.

SAFB members debated vehemently against such a move. The order to require the financial vice president draft something similar to what the executive committee has presented made the board defensive. Members see the idea of improving accountability important, but thought it was unfair to make SAFB do something it hasn't discussed yet whereas the executive committee has had several weeks to create and revise its bill before presenting to Senate.

"I think it's unfair to ask us to take the same bill and change the questions and not have us discuss it within the committee," board member Cassie Witten said.

Weinberg freshman Jonathan Green, one of the group executive accountability bill's authors, said there was enough flexibility for SAFB by altering the questionnaire that would be used to gather feedback from student group leaders. Before the legislative order was presented, Witten argued against using the same form, but said she would like to see the questions changed to include other aspects, such as professionalism of account executives.

ASG President Jon Webber said that when he was talking to more than 20 A-status group leaders, accountability was a big theme that emerged from discussions to improve or change the way SAFB and A-status funding cycle work.

Furthermore, the board did not like the idea of making such information public because of fear of backlash from student groups who resented not get the amount of money requested from the board during the spring funding cycle.

"I think it's limiting," Financial Vice President Seva Rodnyansky said of the legislative order. "Those comments (from student group leaders) would be colored by money and funding."

There is also information about SAFB that members argued to stay within the closed committee. Bogusz argued that presenting the SAFB accountability information to Senate was important.

"The question is whether or not this information should come to you (senators)," he said. "That's assuming the groups we're dealing with are stupid, uninformed and don't deserved to be listened to. We're not here to protect people in our committees. You should all have the information for every committee for which you authorize."

The legislative order to apply the bill's theme to SAFB has failed, but senators hinted that a similar bill might reappear, perhaps for the fourth week in a row.


—ALICE TRUONG

NU Link shuttle poll results in

The poll posted on NU Link in late January gathering student feedback about a Saturday downtown Chicago shuttle was released yesterday at the Associated Student Government meeting.

The ASG external relations committee first took interest in creating a weekend downtown shuttle when the Student-Community Relations Taskforce met in the fall and believed there was a connection between excessive alcohol consumption and the lack of entertainment in Evanston. From its meeting with university services, the committee has found the cost per quarter to operate a Saturday shuttle for eight hours (from 12 p.m. to 10 p.m. with a two-hour gap) to cost $6554.80. The committee expects 25 students to use the shuttle on a one-way trip, which would cost make the cost per passenger $3.28. This cost per trip is higher than using the El, and so the committee would like the university to contribute funding so students wouldn't have to pay more to use the proposed shuttle. The committee also wants to run a test pilot program as early as spring.

The following was taken from the report:

ASG is discussing whether or not operating an Intercampus Shuttle to Chicago on Saturdays would be beneficial for students. Currently, students wishing to visit Chicago on weekends must resort to other forms of public transportation, and in January the CTA is prepared to increase train fares for the El up to $3.25 per ride. Your responses to this short poll will help us decide if we should pursue operating an Intercampus on Saturdays.

2481 responses to the poll as of 2008-02-19 10:49.

1. Would you use the intercampus if it were offered on Saturdays?
   Yes - 98.47%
   No - 1.53%
   
   
2. How many times a quarter do you go into Chicago on Saturday?
   0 - 3.55%
   1-2 - 23.98%
   3-4 - 36.11%
   5+ - 36.36%
   
   
3. How many times a quarter would you use a Saturday?
   0 - 1.98%
   1-2 - 13.74%
   3-4 - 36.28%
   5+ - 48%
   
   
4. Would you go into Chicago more often if it were offered on Saturdays?
   Yes - 98.39%
   No - 1.61%
   
   
5. Please check times for which you would like an inbound route (to Chicago):
   12 pm - 80.13%
   2 pm - 82.31%
   4 pm - 77.27%
   6 pm - 75.65%
   8 pm - 62.19%
   10 pm - 47%
   
   
6. Please check times for which you would like an outbound route (from Chicago):
   1 pm - 36.44%
   3 pm - 53.53%
   5 pm - 73.4%
   7 pm - 78.19%
   9 pm - 84.04%
   11 pm - 84.6%
   1 am - 74.2%
   
   
7. What is the maximum you would be willing to pay per one-way ride?
   $0 - 14.79%
   $1 - 30.35%
   $2 - 42.89%
   $3+ - 10.8%
   
   
8. It is possible that a Saturday could stop at other Chicago locations besides the Ward Building. Please select the attractions in Chicago where you would like the bus to stop:
   Navy Pier - 52.16%
   Millenium Park - 76.62%
   North Michigan Avenue (Water Tower) - 75.17%
   South Michigan Avenue (Wrigley Building, Riverfront) - 45.55%
   Museum Campus (Field Museum, Adler Planetarium, Shedd Aquarium) - 66.38%
   Other attractions: (write-in) - 11.21%

—ALICE TRUONG

Saving $45,000: where ASG decided to cut and spend

The proposed ASG operating budget for this upcoming year has decreased by almost half of the current $88,000 budget, and senators will vote on it next week.

With the 2008-09 budget set at $43,000, the saved $45,000 will mean more money for student groups.

“Hopefully this will improve programming across campus,” Associated Student Government President Jon Webber said.

The largest decrease came from the removal of Associated Student Government student legal services, decreasing $35,000 from the budget, which was used to pay for the salary of the lawyer. The biggest expense in the upcoming budget is paying for ASG-related expenses for Martin Luther King Jr. Day celebrations, costing $20,000.

Webber, a Weinberg senior said that though the current 2007-08 budget is set at $88,000, only about $20,000 has been spent. Much of the savings also included scaling back the budget to what is actually used. For example, ASG allocated $6,000 to spend on copier maintenance for the current year, but Webber said the full amount wasn’t being used. The copier budget has been decreased to $3,500. The Senate retreat was scaled back from a couple thousand dollars to $500 because the retreat will remain on campus.

While many cuts were made in the upcoming budget, several increases were also made.

The fall activities fair’s budget was increased from $4,500 to $6,000 for next year because of increased student turnout and demand. A new “senate project pool” of $5,000 was created for the upcoming year.

“One of my biggest frustrations of the year is that I didn’t set my own budget,” Webber said. “I’m setting the budget for the next person.”

The pool will allow ASG president as well as executive board members and senators to access the funds so long as Senate approves a petition from the people requesting to spend the amount. Because the pool is new to ASG, the amount of money available is set to be small.

“It’s big enough to make a difference, but not big enough to be ridiculous,” he said. “It would allow them to have things on their priority list or agenda.”

Money that wouldn’t be used from the pool would be rolled back to the body. The $43,000 budget includes $1,200 for office supplies; $6,100 for capital technology, including copier maintenance; $9,200 for special events, including the fall and winter activities fairs; $1,500 for Student Activities Finance Board and the executive committee expenses; $20,000 for Martin Luther King Jr. Day programming and $5,000 for the senate project pool.

The following is the report sent out to senators:

2008-2009 ASG Operating Budget Total: $43,000

Office Supplies $1,200
This money will go toward general office supplies for the ASG office and does not include costs associated with the student group printer/copier or the office supplies for the Student Legal Services office. Items include staplers, pens, pencils, paper clips, binders, page protectors, tape, file folders, Post-its, white-out, three-hole puncher, scissors, etc.

Capital Technology $6,100

Copier $3,500
Included in this line item are any charges associated with the student group copier including monthly rental service, paper, toner, staples, and any charges for repairs and/or service calls. Additionally, this line item will cover any costs associated with copying materials at the copy center that are not included in the special events or marketing line items.

Technology $2,000
These funds are to be used for the purchase, maintenance, repair and service of ASG-owned technology equipment. This includes the fax machine, computers, telephone lines, software, printers, etc., but does not include the student group copier. Also includes any lockdown or antitheft measures for the technology.
Sight, Sound, and Seating $600

This line item is to be used for A/V and set up charges associated with Senate meetings, ASG election debates, ASG info sessions, and any other sort of town hall meetings. Any A/V and set up charges incurred for other events will come from the special events line item.

Special Events $9,200

Senate Retreat $500
This will be used to pay for any costs incurred for Senate retreat including venue charges, A/V charges, printing of senator handbooks, and binders for the event.
Fall Activities Fair $6000

This covers venue charges, tent rentals, A/V charges, room setup or other equipment fees, printing of material for handbooks, and any other necessary materials for the Fall Activities Fair.

Winter Activities Fair $500
This covers venue charges, A/V charges, room setup or other equipment fees, printing of material for handbooks, and any other necessary materials for the Winter Activities Fair.

LAB $2000
This covers venue charges, A/V charges, room setup or other equipment fees, printing of material for handbooks, name tags, and any other necessary materials for the Leadership Advisory Board.

Big Bite Nite $200
This money will cover any costs associated with Big Bite Nite including transportation costs, table rentals and any other supplies needed for the execution of the event.

SAFB/ Executive Committee Expenses $1,500

This line item is to be used for any expenses related to the operations of the SAFB/ Executive Committee including student group audits, account executive binders, funding cycle printed materials and annual review supplies. Also, includes costs for co-sponsorship forums.

Martin Luther King Day $20,000

This line item covers all ASG related expenses for the Martin Luther King Day Celebrations. This is specifically for honorariums traditionally requested in the spring term.

Senate Project Pool $5,000

This line will not be able to be used unless the ASG Senate approves a petition from the ASG President & Executive Board to spend a portion of the line for a project.

—ALICE TRUONG

New senator SAFB member

Weinberg junior Michael Hsu was appointed by Associated Student Government Financial Vice President Seva Rodnyansky, and the Senate confirmed him unanimously.

The event was not nearly as elaborate as when Rodnyansky was confirmed when Speaker of the Senate Jesse Garfinkel swore him in over a B-status funding guide earlier this month.


—ALICE TRUONG

Noticeable changes for this week's meeting

Associated Student Government Senate Speaker Jesse Garfinkel is back behind the lectern. He was missing last week. He said it might have been a cold, it might have been scurvy. Who knows?

Behind the desk next to the lectern, James D'Angelo is sporting a new look. ASG has a balder, shinier clerk.


—ALICE TRUONG

The leaner, meaner ASG budget

Treasurer Colin Pound has reported the operating budget for the Associated Student Government has been cut from $88,000 to $42,000 for 2008-09.

More to come.

—ALICE TRUONG

Week 8's Senate agenda

Tomorrow's Associated Student government meeting will revisit a revised group executive accountability bill. The first form this bill was presented by Executive Vice President Matt Bogusz two weeks ago, but it was tabled. The second form was presented last week by three executive committee members, but debate was held off until the bill could be revised. That revised bill will be presented tomorrow.

Senators will also discuss senator accountability measures and there will be a discussion of increasing communication between constituents and senators.


—ALICE TRUONG

UBPC recruits help of ASG committees

In tomorrow's Daily, you'll find in out a lot about how the Undergraduate Budget Priorities Committee will present its recommendations to some senior university administrators this Friday. Though results will not be disclosed until UBPC meets with the university budget committee, with members including President Henry Bienen, Vice President for Student Affairs Bill Banis and Vice President for Business and Finance Eugene Sunshine, the recommendations will help UBPC rank the recommedations.

UBPC, made up of six members, will present four recommendations: wireless Internet on campus, 24-hour study spaces, downtown Chicago Saturday shuttle and renovations to the ground floor of Norris University Center. These issues were gathered from an open December poll in which students listed services they would like to have at Northwestern. A more recent poll posted in early February asked students to rate what the four recommendations.

Several of the recommendations on the priorities list are issues that members of Associated Student Government have been working on themselves. For example, Kate Pascale's external relations committee has been working with university services to create a weekend downtown Chicago shuttle. The committee also put up a poll recently, asking students about what their usage of such a proposed shuttle would be like. UBPC chairwoman Jessica Wash said that she has been collaborating research with Pascale and the external relations committee, and the committee poll results were shared with UBPC.

ASG Academic Vice President Anna Xu's academic committee's wireless subcommittee has been working with Northwestern University Information Technology to see the feasibility of wireless. The results of a recent meeting with NUIT seem good, said Anna Xu who said it is her goal to have wireless in all the dorms by this upcoming Fall Quarter. The academic subcommittee has also worked with UBPC with its research. It has found that 58 percent, or 11, of 19 comparable (in terms of size and status) Consortium on Financing Higher Education institutions have wireless Internet in their dorm. NU falls in line with the eight universities that don't have wireless Internet in their dorms.

Wireless Internet has been a reoccurring UBPC recommendation since 2001, Wash said. Since then, the university has made certain steps toward a wireless campus with its first Virtual Private Network set up in 2002. Last year, students ranked wireless Internet first in the 2007 UBPC poll. Because wireless Internet was packaged with improving cell phone coverage, the university focused on the latter to increase communication options in wake of the Virginia Tech shooting in April.

The other two options include less involvement on the part of ASG members, although it should be noted that the ASG president is an honorary member in the committee, and the recently retired ASG financial vice president Aneesa Arshad is part of the committee as well.

Some interesting points to be made about the other two recommendations:

• In her report about Norris renovations, Arshad said the suggestion to change the ground floor can be traced back to the ASG president from 1984. A quote from last year stated that completely overhauling Norris with new furniture and a new kitchen area would cost $6 million to $8 million. To renovate the ground floor area that doesn't include the kitchen would cost about $2 million less. However, these numbers are a year old and vary with contractors, Arshad said.
• Of US News and World Report's list of national institutions, 18 of the top 20 universities have 24-hour spaces. NU is one of two that doesn't have such a space. A note to keep in mind is that during the Fall Quarter, library hours were extended after UBPC proposed the change last year. At the beginning of Winter Quarter, university and dining officials were thinking of scaling back the University Library's Plaza Cafe hours because not enough students were using them.

—ALICE TRUONG

The executive vice president's bill evolution

For once, the tension from recent ASG meetings didn't stem from battles over dollars and cents. Instead, the rift between Executive Vice President Matt Bogusz, his bill and his committee members was the source of contention.

"I wouldn't call it tension, I would call it love," the Weinberg junior said.

A newly submitted group executive accountability bill sponsored by four executive committee members will be further amended next week. It will be the third week in a row the senate will discuss accountability of its group executives, or members of the executive committee who oversee and audit student groups.

Bogusz presented a similar bill last week that proposed quarterly evaluations of executives to allow senators to make an informed decision when electing members to the executive committee.

“The only power I have as executive vice president to remove someone from committee comes if a committee member doesn’t show up to two meetings,” Bogusz said when presenting the bill in the Feb. 13 Senate meeting. “If I have the worst group executive in the whole wide world, and they show up to every meeting, nothing can be done.”

Although the bill would not give Bogusz the power to remove members, Bogusz said his bill would give student groups, who will make these evaluations, their "check" to the Associated Student Government. The new bill, submitted by Weinberg freshmen Jonathan Green and Claire Lew, Weinberg sophomore Patrick Dawson and Weinberg senior Steve Gorodetskiy supports creating such evaluations but changes the structure of Bogusz's original bill.

Although both bills try to increase the transparency of group executives, the two bear striking differences. It was these differences that split members of Bogusz’s executive committee; many of them argued for the tabling of Bogusz’s bill, four of whom presented the new one Wednesday night.

The bill’s differences rest in reviewers' anonymity and whether such evaluations should be mandatory.

Senate members, including executive committee members, criticized the degree of anonymity provided in Bogusz’s bill.

With his bill, evaluations would be anonymous in such a way that individuals who completed the evaluations would not be identified. However, the student group’s name would be attached to the evaluation. Senators pointed out that evaluations would only be sent to group presidents and treasurers, which could potentially identify the person providing the evaluation.

The new bill's text says the process is "completely anonymous" with neither the individual nor student group's name will be visible on the evaluation itself in order to "honestly evaluate the service that (the) Group Executive has provided."

The other criticism of Bogusz's bill was that such evaluations would not be compulsory. Although Bogusz later said he would be open to amending the bill to make the evaluation mandatory, he said the evaluations should serve more as a tool than an obligation.

"In my experience, things that are mandatory don't go over very well," he said. "Making things mandatory makes people angry and resentful."

The new bill would mandate all student groups to complete such evaluations although no consequences were laid out in the bill for student groups that default on submitting the evaluations.

"We're trying to maximize transparency," said Lew, one of the bill's presenters.


—ALICE TRUONG

Distracting Macbook Air

A good chunk of the left side of the room is completely distracted with a Macbook Air.  Meanwhile, the right side of the room is talking about the newly submitted group executive accountability bill, similar to the one Executive Vice President Matt Bogusz submitted last week.  Bogusz's bill was tabled.

—ALICE TRUONG

Still confused about SAFB?

As one of Aneesa Arshad's — now accomplished — goals, the Student Activities Finance Board has its Web site up and running.  In its frequently asked questions section, among other sections, it explains the intricate processes of SAFB.

The Web site can be found linked from the Associated Student Government Web site.  Its URL is http://groups.northwestern.edu/safb/.

—ALICE TRUONG

The arm of ASG some hope to change

Aneesa Arshad held one of the most – if not the most – powerful student positions on campus.

As the former Associated Student Government financial vice president, the SESP senior oversaw a board that doled out about $1.2 million to student groups last spring.

Last Wednesday, her reign came to an end.

“I’ve learned a lot,” she said to the Senate as the outgoing financial vice president. “It’s sad to go, but change is good.”

Yet questions loom as to what change will come in Arshad’s place.

The change starts with her successor, Weinberg junior Seva Rodnyansky who is making sure the Student Activities Finance Board will be ready for spring funding. 

Right now, Rodnyansky is working on transitioning to the position. Despite having been part of the board since Fall Quarter during his freshman year, he said “there’s always more to learn because it’s a constantly evolving process.”

And if ASG President Jon Webber has his way, the funding process could change more than anyone in SAFB would expect.

Weeks before B-status group funding took place Feb. 13, the Weinberg senior was already thinking of ways to change spring funding for A-status groups which in a time-honored tradition has kept tired senators and student group leaders in a cramped Norris room for many hours.

The board oversees funding for A-status groups, on-campus groups that are typically more established and require more funding. It prepares for the largest event of the year with a set of recommendations in a 60-hour auditing and interviewing process. During the process and throughout the year, the board follows a strict protocol of monthly audits, weekly petition and numerous applications. Some see this process as too rigid, but SAFB members say this is crucial for student group accountability. The board is responsible for the $44 student activities fee every student pays each quarter.

“At the end of the day, this is students’ money,” Arshad said. “And if there weren’t so many rules and procedures, I think people would feel nervous that every cent isn’t being held accountable.”

Webber has yet to announce the funding changes, pending further discussion with Rodnyansky, who has held the office of financial vice president for less than a week now. Webber has talked to over 20 A-status groups’ leaders and compiled pages upon pages of notes in a Word document. He said there are emerging themes from these complaints and suggestions that could potentially alter, or even encourage a major overhaul of, the process, the protocol and the institution. 

With an arm of ASG that is potentially more powerful than the body itself, compiled of six senators and six non-senators, there is a sense of division and friction. Members of the board go into Senate meetings, dressed like career-oriented men and women, occupying a corner of the room and focused on their laptops. But the greatest tension stems from who has the final say at the end of funding.

Senators, who act as a check to the board by debating the funding recommendations, have an amendment pool of about $20,000 during spring funding that they can allocate to the student groups. But most the time, senators pass almost all of the recommendations.

“This is one of the most important things that Senate does,” Arshad said. “And there’s a little bit of tension because (funding) is something that’s supposed to be  ultimately up to the senators, but because we put so much time and have so much knowledge (having audited these groups), we actually – I think a lot of people would agree – have more power in the process.”

Even within the board, with members who might be friends, debates are heated.

“At committee, we go at each other 10 times more than people go at each other in Senate,” Arshad said. “We tear each other apart.”

But there are no hard feelings – such debate is crucial to the board’s effectiveness, Arshad said.

“If we’re not debating, and we don’t really disagree, then we’re not doing our job,” she said.

This is all before they make their recommendations. These internal divisions don't make a difference when recommendations are finalized. When the board presents the funding recommendations, it presents them as one board.

Relations between the board and student groups most obviously become strained during the funding process because “there’s never enough money to go around,” Arshad said.

Unhappy groups can mobilize and bring a number of members to the Senate meeting to debate funding. While a group might try to get the largest slice from the senate’s discretionary pie, Arshad said outsiders’ presence sometimes signals student group disapproval of the board.

As the newest financial vice president, Rodnyansky is face of SAFB. Even though he has his own set of goals to bring in change, he, like Arshad did, will face difficulties – not from outsiders, but from the position itself. It’s a difficulty that Webber, in his quest to change the board, will have to deal with as well.

“Each financial vice president has goals … But it’s just so overwhelming the things you have to do day to day,” Arshad said. “There are things I wanted to do that I couldn’t.”

—ALICE TRUONG

Jam packed ASG meeting in summary

Today's Senate meeting was surprising.

So surprising that Associate Student Government Senate Speaker Jesse Garfinkel called it smooth, a word many wouldn't expect to characterize a Senate meeting with a packed agenda: financial vice president confirmation, B-status funding allocating about $28,000 and two bills — as most bills — dealing with complex issues.

A motion was even made to delay B-status funding to avoid not giving enough attention to the two bills scheduled in Senate. But what actually happened was a 20-minute funding session and the remainder of the time dedicated to heated debates to the two bills: one concerning group executive accountability and the other about Northwestern's non-discrimination policy.

Ultimately, the meeting could be summed into five votes:

• Seva Rodnyansky was unanimously confirmed as the new financial vice president — sworn in with a not-so-elaborate ceremony with one hand in the air and the other on a B-status funding packet.
  
• Flicker was de-recognized, with 60 percent of the votes concurring with the committee decision.
• Brown Sugar was denied its $100 request with 77 percent of votes.
• The group executive accountability bill was motioned with 71 percent of the votes.
• The Northwestern Gender Protection Initiative bill was passed with 80 percent in favor.

Of course, for more details and analysis, look back at the blog entries.

—ALICE TRUONG

Why B-Status funding was so painless this year

ANALYSIS

B-status funding flew by this year, with only one debate concerning Brown Sugar occurring throughout the entire process which lasted less than 30 minutes. Student group leaders for the most part sat in their chairs complacently, neither motioning for more money for their student groups nor disagreeing with the Executive Committee's funding recommendations for other groups.

"Funding went smoothly and I'd like to think that was Executive Committee's ability to meet with student groups and get their reasoning before the meeting," said ASG Speaker Jesse Garfinkel.

On the whole, Weinberg sophomore Garfinkel is probably right. But besides the conclusion that student groups were largely satisfied with the Executive Committee's funding recommendations and their reasoned collaboration with student groups staved off funding battles between student groups, the structure of B-status funding allows for this funding cycle, unlike A-status funding cycles in the Fall and Spring quarters, to be fairly painless for senators and group leaders (and Daily bloggers) to sit through.

Executive Committee must allocate every penny of their funding pool ($21,480.80 this year) in their recommendation. In contrast, the Student Activities Finance Board, which oversees A-status group funding, cannot recommend all of their funds because of a senate amendment pool which ASG senators can allocate at their own discretion. This extra money forces senators and student group leaders to debate over where this extra money should be allocated. This can get sticky.

In addition, there is more money at stake under A-status funding, with SAFB allocating nearly a million dollars to about 40 A-status groups . This increased funding pool coupled with fewer student groups to allocate this money to complicates the funding process. You can already see the questions forming in student group leaders' heads. Who's getting the most money? Why can't we as a student group siphon off some of their money for our cause? Enter debate here.

On the other hand, B-status student groups have only a quarter of the funds A-status groups have. This is primarily due to the lower operating cost of these B-status student groups. Performances need a couple thousand dollars to put on, as opposed to the A-status student groups which must spend tens of thousands of dollars to bring speakers and put on massive events. This makes it kind of pointless for small student groups to fight other small, cash-strapped student groups for more funding. It's just too mean to do otherwise.

Furthermore, some of the B-status student groups are new or still acclimating to ASG funding. Many newly recognized groups that have been bumped from T-status to B-status, and groups with only a few years of development under their belts do not feel like they have enough clout or the group membership to fight for more money.

Other B-status groups may be intimidated by the complexities surrounding the bureaucracy of ASG and their funding methods. The "newbie effect" affecting some student groups makes them complacent to Executive Committee's funding recommendations. And perhaps some groups are not fully aware of all of the ASG's funding guidelines either, as four student groups failed to meet funding guidelines this year and were docked because of it.

It's difficult to allocate funds to student groups. Funding guidelines were created to maintain fiscal responsibility to the students who pay for these student groups. In addition, ASG must broker compromises between student groups so that everyone gets a portion of the pie. This is all a complicated process, and the fact that there was only one dissension this year cannot be wholly attributed to the Executive Committee's prowess.

There are many factors at play here.

-Paul Takahashi, veteran ASG reporter

Gender Initiative bill passed

The Northwestern Gender Protection Initiative's bill asking for Associated Student Government Jon Webber and the ASG executive board members to lobby the university administration for its key issues passed with 70 percent tonight.

According to members of the initiative, of the top 15 nationally ranked universities, NU is one of three to not include a gender protection clause in its non-discrimination policy. The initiative hopes to include gender identity and expression in the university non-discrimination policy.

With the bill, ASG will lobby university administration to amend the policy to include these aspects as well as examine logistical concerns, such as gender-neutral on-campus residences and bathrooms.

Debate centered largely on issues initiative member McCormick junior Mykell Miller considered irrelevant.

Some ASG members, such as Weinberg freshman Jonathan Green and Communication junior James D'Angelo, thought that it was contradictory to add a particular group to a non-discrimination policy.

Part of the debate was also dedicated to the definition of gender identity, with some mistaking it for sexual orientation.

For D'Angelo, he didn't think there was discrimination on campus based on gender identity.

"I've never wanted any student to feel uncomfortable," the ASG clerk said. "I'm not convinced there's been any wrongdoing thus far."

Members of the initiative who presented the bill — Rainbow Co-President Kelsey Pacha, Rainbow Senator Patrick Dawson and Miller — were appalled at his statement.

Miller said students who identify themselves with a different gender identity do suffer from discrimination.  He knows it personally.

He was forced to live in an all-female suite during his freshman year.  His Wildcard still has his legal name even though he goes by Mykell.

The initiative is currently working on discussing logistical issues with residential life.  It hopes to create a suite, wing or floor converted to gender-neutral housing in two dorms: one on North Campus and one on South Campus.  The initiative also is hoping to create single stall, gender-neutral restrooms.  About 40 percent of restrooms would be all-male and 40 percent all-female.

—ALICE TRUONG

Group executive accountability bill tabled

The bill Executive Vice President Matt Bogusz presented to increase group executive accountability has been tabled.

In order to bring it back up, a three-fourth Senate vote will be needed earliest by next week or a new bill can be submitted.

The Weinberg junior's bill would create an evaluation system on group executives, but many senators said the bill's details need to be worked out before it can be passed.

"You don't know who the executive vice president will be in five years," Bogusz said. "Frankly, it's the Senate's committee, not the executive vice president's committee."

The bill would create a quarterly evaluation by student groups using a form that many senators would like to see changed.

Weinberg freshman Jonathan Green who is part of Bogusz' executive committee motioned to table the bill because he said the form that would be used is not representative and would not be anonymous. The form was sent to student group presidents and treasurers. The group would be known to the group executive but not the individual members, Bogusz said.

Under current guidelines, the executive vice president cannot remove members under any condition other than the members missing two meetings.

"If I have the worst group executive in the whole wide world, and they show up to every meeting, nothing can be done," Bogusz said.

"There's a possibility a group executive might get a bad rating," he said. "That's not the intent of the legislation. This piece of legislation should be used as a tool by an incumbent to say, 'This is why you should elect me.' "

Weinberg junior Will Upton said that while he thinks the bill is a good idea, he thinks the bill's details need to be straighted out.

"I haven't a heard a single thing about this," the off-campus senator said. "I'd like to see more discussion of this outside of Senate. I'd like to have some more input by the executive committee."


—ALICE TRUONG

Funding passed, no recommendations changed

And the room has cleared out. The once-filled room forcing some students to sit on the floor is now half empty.

Funding has been approved at 7:55 p.m. No recommendations have been changed.


—ALICE TRUONG

Motion to add money to Brown Sugar failed

The South Asian Student Alliance senator requested on behalf of Brown Sugar to add $100 to the group's recommended amount of $0, midway through the add round.

Sighs and growns emanated from the back row of senate, signaling student group leaders' discontent at the debate that will ensue. Brown Sugar requested $460, but were recommended $0 by the Executive Committee.

SASA senator Sheena Agarwal, a Weinberg sophomore, defended Brown Sugar, saying "(the Executive Commitee's recommendation) was unfair" because of a "miscommunication" between the group's leader and the Executive Committee.

Executive Vice President Matt Bogusz disagreed with the representative's reasoning.

"Brown Sugar did not meet with their group executive," said Executive Vice President Matt Bogusz. This, he said, violated the committee's guidelines, which required Brown Sugar's leaders to meet with their group executive.

The motion to add more money to Brown Sugar was shut down by ASG. This motion was the first and only one during the extremely short funding cycle, which means the student groups were by in large content with the Executive Committee's recommendations.

-Paul Takahashi

No motions to cut in first round

First round of funding starts with cuts made to recommendations.

With the exception of a question about Significant Others' recommendation being larger than what the group requested, no student leader or senator has requested any group's funding to be reduced.

ASG Speaker Jesse Garfinkel asked why Significant Others' recommendation of $315 exceeded its requested $300. The group requested $50 for publicity, and the executive committee recommended $65 because of a standardized rate for publicity funds.


—ALICE TRUONG

How B-Status funding works

Steps: Executive Committee received funding petitions from student groups, met with each group and made recommendations based on their audits and Executive Committee member's oversight of the group. The committee then recorded their recommendations in their funding packet, which both senators and student group leaders reviewed before this ASG meeting.

Tonight, student group leaders can appeal the Executive Committee's recommendations. If they request for more money, funds must be taken away from another student group. The senate will vote on each add (motion to add more money than the recommended amount) or cut round (motion to decrease the amount of funds awarded to a group). Debate over these funding changes will ensue, which will ultimately be decided by a senate vote. All in all, it's a long process.

-Paul Takahashi

Motion to rearrange orders of business failed

SESP senior Ivy LeTourneau motioned to change the order of business to bring the two bills — group executive accountability and gender protection — in front of B-status funding. A vote of two-thirds of the Senate would be needed. The motion failed.

LeTourneau said it would be better to change the order of business because in previous years business after funding "kind of just gets shoved through and not properly considered."

Executive Vice President Matt Bogusz asked for a show of hands to see how many student group leaders were there to "protect student funding."

With one of the busiest meeting of the year, a substantial amount of hands went up.

"It was set to be first on the docket," the Weinberg junior said. "We hope to make a quick process ... Student groups are just waiting to talk about funding."


—ALICE TRUONG

Flicker Film Festival derecognition appeal failed

ASG voted against an appeal by Flicker Film group to overturn Student Activities Finance Board's decision to derecognize the group.

The Flicker Film student group has been derecognized by the SAFB and is appealing the decision tonight. SAFB's allocation of $8,700 to Flicker hinged on ASG's vote tonight.

"We have nothing against the student group, it's definitely of merit on campus," outgoing FVP Aneesa Arshad said. "But they failed this year and last year in fulfilling their A-Status responsibilities."

The group's president, Muindi Muindi, said he failed to turn in their application, resulting in their account with SAFB to be frozen.

"It's my fault," he said.

Habitat for Humanity and Students Blood Services are examples of other student groups which were de-recognized by ASG over the last two years.

-Paul Takahashi

New FVP sworn in

Weinberg junior Seva Rodnyansky has been confirmed as the new Associated Student Government financial vice president.

In an impromptu ceremony in a filled ASG meeting of senators and student group members, Senate Speaker Jesse Garfinkel swore in the new financial vice president over the B-status funding recommendations packet.

"I want to thank Senate, ASG exec, my board for making this a pleasurable experience," current Financial Vice President Aneesa Arshad said. "I've learned a lot. It's sad to go, but change is good."

Today's meeting is the last session the SESP senior will act as financial vice president.


—ALICE TRUONG

B-Status Funding meeting begins

Ten minutes past 7 p.m., the Associated Student Government Speaker Jesse Garfinkel calls the ASG senate meeting to order through the screechy mic. Executive Committee's funding of about 42 B-status student groups will dominate much of the meeting, and it shows in the incredible number of student group leaders and senators crammed in the meeting room at Norris tonight.

The second annual B-Status group funding is organized by the Executive Committee, headed by Executive Vice President, Matt Bogusz. This funding cycle, which always occurs during the Winter Quarter, will fund groups that are less established or can carry their activities without much help from ASG.

-Paul Takahashi

B-status funding in less than 5 hours

At tonight's Associated Student Government meeting starting at 7 p.m., the scheduled agenda for last week will ensue today.  Last week's Senate, along with evening classes, was cancelled because of weather conditions.

This will be a big event.  Last year's Daily ASG beat reporter Paul Takahashi will join me to live blog the entire meeting.  Check back the blog for more details in a couple hours.

—ALICE TRUONG

Plaza Cafe hours still intact, possible airport shuttles, publicity guidelines re-evaluated

When Plaza Cafe's extended hours weren't used enough by students last quarter, its hours were almost pushed back to midnight.

After Associated Student Government President Jon Webber met with officials from university dining services, they decided to keep the hours open for another quarter. The library cafe's hours were extended to 2 a.m. Sunday to Thursday for the first time during Fall Quarter because of ASG lobbying.

"It's been a long priority of ASG to keep library hours extended very late," the Weinberg senior said.

In the Student-Community Relations Task Force report that was released last month, the task force identified the creation of "third spaces," or space for students to socialize during late-night weekends, as a priority. The current Undergraduate Budget Priorities Committee also lists 24-hour study spaces as a possible recommendation.

"We are trying to do everything we can to make sure library hours are utilized, so hours aren't shortened," Webber said.

As a part of the extended- hours agreement, ASG publicized the cafe hours through listserv e-mails last week.

The cafe was deemed to have low usage last quarter by the number of register transactions, Webber said. The hours for the cafe will be re-evaluated at the end of the quarter.

Webber is also talking with University Services about the feasibility of creating a shuttle before and after breaks to transport students to the airport. If established, the shuttle would probably run the last two days of the quarter and the day before classes started, he said.

The ASG executive board has also been working with University Services about a possible weekend Chicago shuttle. The committee is polling student support for the proposal on NU Link, asking students when they'd like the shuttle to run, how much they'd be willing to pay and what shuttle stops they would use in downtown Chicago.

In addition, ASG and university officials will re-evaluate publicity guidelines on campus. Webber said he has gathered feedback from about 40 student group leaders through an e-mail questionnaire about how they publicize events and what they'd like to see.

"We're taking a look at how successful current methods are," he said.

—ALICE TRUONG

Two applications for financial vice president

According to current SESP senior Aneesa Arshad, Associated Government financial vice president, she has received two applications for the FVP position.  Arshad will chair the selection committee as a nonvoting member (except in the event of a tie).  

There are six voting members in the committee: ASG president, speaker of senate, Student Activities Finance Board advisor, most veteran senator member of SAFB, most veteran non-senator member of SAFB and a senator elected from the Senate.

—ALICE TRUONG

ASG meeting cancelled due to weather

The drama of B-status funding will have to wait another week.

 

Associated Student Government Senate is cancelled, along with evening classes, because of the weather.  The winter storm has already left 1,000 flights stranded at O'Hare Airport and could bring as much as a foot of snow, the Chicago Tribune reported.

ASG President Jon Webber said the meeting was postponed to avoid low turnout for B-status group members who would've shown up at the meeting to debate funding.

Other items on the agenda were two bills, one concerning Northwestern's non-discrimination policy and the other about group executive accountability.

—ALICE TRUONG

Preview for Feb. 6 ASG meeting

Tomorrow is the start of B-status group funding. The Daily will be live-blogging the event, so check out the latest news as it breaks tomorrow, starting at 7 p.m.

In addition to funding, two bills introduced at last week’s meeting will go to floor.

• Protecting Gender at NU aims to change the university’s non-discrimination policy.
  
• Group Executive Accountability aims to conduct quarterly evaluations of group executives that work with B- and T- status groups.
  

Associated Student Government financial vice president applications are due tomorrow to current FVP Aneesa Arshad. As of late morning today, the SESP senior said. Check out The Daily's print version for more information to come soon.


—ALICE TRUONG