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

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

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

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

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