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