Your turn!

So, dear readers, what do you think?

Should the constitution on the SFUO website be updated after every board meeting? Do you want to be able to access an up-to-date version of it?

The version on the SFUO's website hasn't been updated since August 2008. If I didn't go to the BOAs, I would have no effing clue what was going on.

Adding a Motion to the Agenda

Antonio - any changes to the constitution be changed on the ONLINE version of the constitution, before the next BOA meeting after the change. It is too expensive and eco-negligent to do it on paper all the time.

Dean - there hasn t been an updated version, because he wants to get the entire French side re-translated

Rob - there is a lot backlogged now, but once we catch up, it will be easy.

Antonio - agree with Rob. InDesign is pretty easy to update.

Dean - it s not as easy as you THINK. minutes have to be approved before it is changed, so that it is not presumptive. He will look into it. He is for the motion.

Dick - giving speaking rights to Michele: I do it now for Arts constitution - much smaller, but still - could just post the changed amendments on the website, instead of changing the actual document every time, so save time/work.

Cheeeeeeeeve - wants to table this to the policy and by-law committee

carries. it s for them to deal with now. ha.

Antonio proposes a motion:

"Any changes successfully made to the constitution must be added to the online version of the constitution before the beginning of the next Board of Administration meeting. If the changes have yet to be made, then the changes must be presented at the beginning of the next BOA meeting"

By-Law 13 motion

so much round-abouting.

here is a summary:

(one of many?) amendment result: Droit-Civil still has to do 101 week training with the rest of the Federated Bodies' 101 week Guides (even though, they realllllly don t want to)

motion result: 101 week By-Law 13 motion passes. everyone actually cheered.

i really wish i had paid more attention for all of you readers, but it is just so tired in here...

oh shit - new director throws down the F word...

FROSH!

it's 101 week, Fabrice. yeesh.

Motion for pizza.

Cameron motions for a pizza order - 'we re wilting!'

Dean: compromise - we will have pizza at the next meeting

Fancie - point of order: we re supposed to be fixing our now-hunger, not our later hunger.

...

real motion: 10 minute recess. bahaha. fails. continue to WILT!

(suckas - bloggers had hallway pizza)

if you have noticed a bit of a lag in our blogging abilities...

the hangovers have JUST hit pretty damn hard. sorry, kids. we re trying our bestest.

Dean looks sleepy!

Someone call for a recess!

Still discussing the changes to By-Law 13.
Fancie just twirled into the room.
Some smokers have snuck out.

My feet keep falling asleep.

Bah!

Discussing By-Law 13.

Joël gives the Commies a shout-out for running a completely accessible 101-week, with a balance of wet & dry events.

Joël has finally finished reading the motion.

Wow.

someone needs a recess...

CJ has spent the better part of this motion gripping, looking at and generally sort of making out with a cigarette.

ew.

By-law 13 revisions

Joël mentions "sexual activities" and "dirty things".

Everyone has perked up.

Joël is reading a very long motion. Everyone looks very bored.

Seamus seems sleepy.
Mike Fancie may be doing his homework.
Roxanne is stretching.

12.16 Veterans

CJ is shot down by Federico. NO DEBATING A MOTION ON THE SECOND READING!

Second Reading: Veterans

passes.

12.15: Time

The motion.

Ryan : The BOA is a time- vampire (timeburglar! - Seamus)

All in favour! Motion passessss

Motion is adopted - you now need the support of 2/3 of the BOA for an appeal to be brought to them.

"Set aside your politics and make a responsible decision." - Ted Horton, speaking in favour of the threshold being 2/3 for hearing an appeal.

motion to hear the appeal 2! the sequel!

Ted thinks it s not so bad, since it was proposed in December. Does not see hearing an appeal as an attack on the SAC. It's just as political to say we will not hear an appeal as to say we will. Down with Dick's idea about 2/3, 4/5, but will vote in favour of this motion, regardless.

Julie agrees with Ted. This is why we have directors.

Ryan wants a roll call vote. forthwith!

vote: 21 in favour, 5 against.

Sooooo, they only need 2/3 to hear a SAC appeal.

after 5 minutes of debate, Federico reveals:

MOTION TO TABLE IS NOT DEBATEABLE

OOPSIES.

Motion fails.

Hearing Appeals.

People keep talking about voting blocks.

"Anyone who is voting against hearing the appeal is voting against hearing evidence, and therefore has a political agenda...". - Becky Wallace

"I voted against hearing the appeal for e-voting. It's about voting whether or not its constitutional. It's not about denying students the right to be heard....this is how the board should be doing things. What it comes down to is does it warrant the board's time? ". - Ryan Kennery

"A lot of members have framed this about whether or not the SAC is objective. This is about whether or not htey can make mistakes. And they can. And there needs to be a form of recourse for students. Regarding the board slate that people keep referring to...we need to commit to what is sensible and what is just. " - CJ Symons.

Cameron proposes a motion to table

"I think these are all good arguments, but i can't think about it without thinking about the present situation"

"I agree. People's feelings are a bit clouded. It's a bit hard to distance yourself from something that touches many people at this board" - Richard Mah

Seamus: "That's wacky!"

Motion to hear the appeal

8.8.14 - changing to 2/3 vote to hear a request for appeal (as opposed to 4/5).

(Amy: is this questions or debate? Federico: ... uhhh... Dean: it's debate.)

Amy is against the change - thinks there should be a higher threshold to hear an appeal than to pass it, so that the same set of 2/3 cannot just force the decision (ps 'conflictual' is not a word).

Rob agrees with Amy - thinks she already said what he thinks

Kennery also against the motion - we JUST changed it from 'unanimous' ... moving too far from that too quickly. SAC is objective and should only be questioned if it is very serious - hence high pass quotient

CJ is for the motion. He is worried that important miscarriages of justice will not be addressed (it s not like they are taking OUT the process...).

Amy does not want to detract from the SAC's legitimacy.

Dean - there is a difference between hearing an appeal and voting for an appeal... Thinks the threshold should be even lower! Doesn t feel that it is a LOW threshold. (SAC = existential body, apparently... WTF?)

Becky is for the motion. Wants to see the evidence to be able to decide if the appeal is valid - wants to make it more accessible to students.

Dick is against the motion, and thinks we should trust our own process of choosing arbitrators, paying due diligence, etc. Does not like that the same set of people could vote to hear and to pass. Thinks that perhaps they should switch the 2/3 and 4/5 amounts.

Cameron is against the motion, because she thinks it is inappropriate at this time. She likes Dick's idea though.

Federico - motion was submitted before the elections even happened. So, it s coincidental.

Seamus wants to clarify that the SAC is not judiciary. Doesn t know why ANYONE wouldn t want to make it easier to hear appeals. that s just WACKY! ... obvs, he is for the motion.

(ps 8.1 Functions - The judicial authority of the Federation is vested in the SAC. fail.)

Sarah Jayne thinks the issues of legitimacy are overblown.

.... lots of debate. sorry, it s getting repetitive. talk to your fave BOA member if you want to know exactly what they said...

Becky - 'i never get any info! we should just hear everything!' her argument seems to always have some sort of 'it s hard to be informed when you re at RGN' whine-fest.

Ryan - you just READ the decision. Then you are informed. Was it a solid ruling or not?

Cameron - we should table this because of our current situation. I can t not think of it.

Dick - agreed!

Tabling? nope. shot down. ridiculous.

to be con't...

Policy & By-Law Committee (an exciting committee!!....)

Sarah Jayne has nominated herself. No one else is interested in being on the committee. No questions. No debate.

She's now on the Committee

Aaaaaaaaaand we're back!

Back in the room!

The new SAC arbitrators have been chosen.

Also, the BOA has decided that it s cool that Federico broke the rulez last time when he pushed through the vote despite all of the abstentions.

lovely. [<-- sarcasm, unless you couldn t tell...]

La Rotonde, The Fulcrum, BOA Voice, and KJ360 are all sitting in the hallway. Boo.
But we have Chex Mix!

kicked out for in camera.

mmm, hallway.

feel free to send us pizza love.... : D

Cheevers to Fabrice: Welcome aboard!

har har har.

15-minute recess. We're waiting for the lawyer, and then there's going to be an in-camera session.
oh goody.

Joël talks about the selection of board members to fill vacant seats.

They looked at the resumes! and coverletters! go team!

Motion to ratify Fabrice Yoboua (Science) & Sarah Jayne King (Social Sciences) as members of the board.
No debate. 2 against, 1 abstention.
Motion passes.

Applause. They are excited about this.

Ryan: What's the timeline for removing tobacco products from the PIVIK?

Roxanne: May 1 2009. There will be a LIQUIDATION! We're trying to clear it all out!

Ryan: Seamus, help us out!

lulz all around

Where's the money?

Questions for Exec

Rob to Roxanne: Why are Fed Bodies still waiting for money and info and meetings and everything?! There is no communication...

Rox: I don t know what you mean about no communication! you might not know this, but I communicate with Fed Bodies all the time...

(Rob = Prez of a Fed Body ... just sayin')

Dean to interwebs: "OH HAI!!!"

VP Communication Update

Julie is confused.

Working on Plastic Bag-Free campus...branding and website and exciting things.
Starting a newsletter for RGN specifically, hopefully to launch for September.
Semaine de la Francophone apparently had a lot of media coverage.
RIP! A remix manifesto is next week.

Updatezzz.

Social:

- End of Year Bash Theme - Light Brite - 5$ as of Monday

- Planning Leader Action - 'wants to have smoothest transition ever' ... great, but who are you transitioning?

Student Affairs:

- Semaine de la Francophonie, etc

- yay Volunteer Gala

- Services Emergency Fund

Comm (who Seamus is creepily staring and nodding at throughout her update... ?):

- Islam Awareness Week

- Plastic Bag Campaign

- bunch of other stuff

- something about dj snugglebots

- not too much to do with comm... but, lots going on I spose...

VP Seamus:

- something about rave cards and translation (was he telepathically getting Julie to do his update, and now he is doing hers?!?)

- blah blah, Fed Gov t budget is bad for students, CFS Ontario exec meeting next weekend, blah.

Money:

- 1848 made big dollars on St Patty's day! yay for drunken students!

- job postings are online

- has ideas re: fed purchases without using personal credit cards

Prez:

- thanks to our gentle viewers - once Ken gets us up and running...

- he's wrapping up his year.

Some exciting events coming up...

Relay for Life - Friday night!
PANDAMONIUM lineup: Bedouin Soundclash, Metric, and Malajube
End of Year Bash Theme : LIGHTBRIGHT!! Tickets on sale on Friday for 5$ at the SFUO office
SFUO apparel lineup - 4 concepts ready, probably launching in september

Adoption of the minutes

Tabled! Minutes from last meeting aren't ready yet.

Someone suggests that we split the room between observers and board members.
It isn't actually a problem though.
hah.

And we're here!

It was Arts Ball and International Gala last night.
The BOA-ers are hungover.

Ken is doing a livefeed of the meeting at kj360. You can also get the support files over at Amy Kishek's blog. Follow along with us!