AAS SENATE MEETING

Monday, February 23, 2004

 

I. Attendance

SENIOR SENATORS

5

Jim Beck

X

Kay Bradley

X

Mihailis Diamantis

/

Lincoln Mayer

X

Preston Scheiner

X

Luke Swarthout

X

JUNIOR SENATORS

 

Ethan Davis

X

Rosalyn Foster

X

Jin-Young Kim

X

Arpan Podduturi

X

Daniel Reiss

X

Christian Sanchez

X

David Scherr

X

Justin Sharaf

U

SOPHOMORE SENATORS

 

Rania Arja

X

Taamiti Bankole

X

Caleb Deats

X

John Lian

X

Stephen Scriber

X

Mira Serrill-Robins

X

Ian Shin

X

Matt Vanneman

X

FRESHMEN SENATORS

 

Richa Bhala

/

Avi Das

U

Noah Isserman

U

Marco Locascio

X

Gloria Monfrini

X

Levan Moulton

X

Christina Ryu

X

Jacob Thomas

U

TOTAL SENATORS

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE BRANCH

 

 

 

Elan Ghazal

X

Ryan Park

X

Ryan Smith

X

Di Shui

X

Paris Wallace

X

LEGEND:

 

 

 

 

 

x = Present

 

 

 

 

E = Excused Absence

 

 

U = Unexcused Absence

 

/ = Half an Absence

 

 

 

II. Call to Order (9:03 PM)

 

III. Approval of the Minutes (9:04 PM)

Roz: Motion to approve the minutes.

Ian: Second.

Matt, Mira, and Elan make corrections.

Minutes are passed by unanimous consent.

 

IV. Officer Reports (9:05 PM)

A. President

Ryan: I wrote a letter to the physical plant about an increased level of cigarette butts outside as a result of the new smoking policy. I also sent the letter to President Marx.

Reads letter.

Ryan: I thought ashtrays outside the buildings may be a solution. The AAS has reserves and we could help with the costs and since the President’s Office started this policy they could help pay for this.

Luke: The reason ashtrays aren’t allowed outside Valentine is because it is an eating facility. I don’t know if that is true for the other buildings. There are other reasons you may want to look into.

B. Vice President

Elan: I want to congratulate our new JC Chair, and Senior Senators.

 

V. Announcements (9:08)

Matt: There are two senior slots open and three people are tied with three votes each. Also, the student survey on funding interests is going out this Thursday. Tell all of your constituents to vote for what they think their student activities fees should go to.

Kay: I have been charged with ordering sweatpants for the AAS. I wanted to see who would be interested in ordering them. Counts hands.

Rania: I just got a phone call that there will be a Bradley Shuttle the 12th and 13th of March. I am asking for your support when I ask the BC to fund it next week.

 

VI. Special Orders (9:12 PM)

A. Oath of Office

JC Chair Ryan Smith

Senior Senators

B. Weekly BC Funding Recommendations

Club

Requested

Recommend

Allocated

Hillel

$700.00

$300.00

$300.00

ACF

$348.20

$0.00

$348.20

ACF

$500.00

$500.00

$500.00

Sailing

$60.00

$60.00

$60.00

Bodies

$100.00

$100.00

$100.00

Philosophy

$800.00

$800.00

$800.00

Riding

$483.00

$483.00

$483.00

Total

$2,991.20

$2,243.0

$2,585.20

Roz: Motion to pass the BC Funding Recommendations

Dan: What percent have we been spending at?

Paris: We have given out about $8,000.

Ethan: We decided not to fund the ACF speaker because it was after the fact, but it came to our attention that there is no bylaw that says we can’t fund after the fact. I think we should change that if reasonable justification is given.

Rob: I believe the BC should evaluate events based on their individual merit. I felt like there should have been more discussion. Discretionary funding is meant to make up for gaps in clubs’ budgets. I understand you have a limited amount of money and don’t like to use it for travel. ACF has really tried to cut down this semester. This is our only speaker that is not local. We don’t have any housing costs because she stayed with our faculty advisor. A lot of the upperclassmen had close personal relationships with her and we know she is a great speaker. We don’t anticipate any other discretionary funding requests this semester and this is why we are asking for this. I am here to answer questions. I don’t feel the BC actually looked at the request.

Paris: I think there are a couple things that you are not quite aware of. Discretionary funding is not used to fund budgetary gaps, it is to fund new programming. Last semester there were several events where ACF came after the fact and we said they had to come before. This is the third time this has happened. We also paid $300 for the speaker to come as well and there was a reason why we didn’t fund this in the initial budget. You had a lot more speakers coming this semester from other clubs. Last semester we asked repeatedly for you to get your stuff in on time.

Matt: Basically, the BC evaluated this request and we thought the speaker was merited. In all of the club budgets we didn’t allocate travel for any speakers except for one. The point of not allocating traveling money is to get other organizations to participate. I understand that there was a large mix up between the treasurers last semester and this semester. Rob, can you please explain why, in your unique case, should ACF get funding after the fact.

Rob: We had a big turnover in our leadership. I took over as treasurer and by the time we got together with this it was past the event. It took time for things to get on their way.

Roz: I just think it is important to note that there is a turnover and that they did come to us as soon as they could with the ticketed expense after the fact.

Ryan: Point of information – is there an amendment on the floor?

Elan: No.

Christian: I think they merit funding. I don’t know why we are bringing up things about them getting their act together because of last semester. It seems like the BC was penalizing them for things that occurred before. I want to amend to give $348.20 for the speaker.

Roz: Second.

Luke: The one thing that hasn’t been said is that the reason we don’t fund clubs after the fact is that we get into the problematic situation of having to bail out clubs afterward. You end up putting individual clubs in a really sticky situation. On the merit it seems great, but there is a reason why we habitually don’t do it. There is a solid reason why we don’t have this as a policy.

Elan: No group should operate on the assumption that they will be funded.

Ethan: My only problem with this is consistency. I want a clear answer as to what makes this event worthy of funding even though it is after the fact.

Rob: Everything happened based on the good faith that we would get the money.

Paris: My question is one, this was in your initial request so you have known for 2-3 months that it wasn’t there and second, after you knew last semester that you weren’t going to get the funding, did you go to other sources for funding?

Elan: We are still going back to procedural issues.

Rob: We couldn’t have come last semester for discretionary funding about something that happened this semester.

Dave: She came during the second week of the semester. Rob himself didn’t know he was going to be the treasurer until that first week.

Mira: Call the question.

SEE VOTE 13 BELOW. $348 Increase Amendment for ACF Speaker Travel Expense - MOTION PASSES: 15-9-2.

Lincoln: Call the question.

SEE VITE 14 BELOW. BC Funding Recommendations – MOTION PASSES: 26-0-0.

C. FLICS

Paris: I met with FLICS and Dean Haynes and as you know there is a master general fund where some organizations get permanently funded. It would make sense for FLICS to be included in this because it is not under the general budgeting thing and we have given them everything they initially asked for.

Elan: I need the percentages because they are in the bylaws. Is it within 3%?

Paris: It is, but we don’t want to do it that way. We don’t have the exact percentages right now.

Rania: I think looking at the policies shouldn’t be the question right now.

Marco: Point of information – can you clarify the issue here?

Elan: Every year we get student activities fee. A part of those fees goes to the master general and the way it is computed it has a set percentage for the PVTA, etc. You should probably fix the percentages to go along with that.

Paris: How about passing a motion that says we approve taking $6400 of the budget and adjust it accordingly.

Luke: Could we just do this at all one time?

Dan: I like this idea and I would like to motion to pass Paris’ recommendation to adjust in terms of quantity and not percent.

Roz: Second.

Lincoln: I think there might be other things we want to go such as TYPO. We may want to get that into the master general fund. I think we should make this decision later on since there is no disadvantage to waiting.

Roz: Motion to table.

Lincoln: Second

MOTION PASSES.

D. Student Interest Survey

Paris: Next is the student interest survey. The sections are obviously messed up because the biggest clubs are all together. If you have 50 general interest clubs and 2 non general interest clubs, it is obviously going to screw with the numbers. What is going to happen, for example, is that cultural affinity clubs are going to get the most votes.

Marco: I think the survey is kind of vague. I think you are going to get a lot of erroneous surveys.

Paris: Ok, we’ll change that.

Mihailis: Point of information – Was this a constitutional amendment?

Elan: It is a constitutional amendment. This survey has to be approved by majority vote of the Senate. The way it is written is that it has to be approved by a majority of the Budgetary Committee/Senate.

Dave: What exactly are we doing right now?

Luke: We are just motioning to pass this.

Ethan: There were reasons why we did change it last semester. The student body doesn’t really have knowledge about all of these clubs and that was the main reason why we changed this.

Mira: Is it constitutional to do this now?

Elan: It is unconstitutional that we didn’t do it last semester. Considering that no one brought this up until I brought it to the BC’s attention last weekend we can vote on it in Thursday’s election.

Ryan: I am opposed to this because of the lack of quality information it is going to give.

Luke: We have to do something. We can’t choose not to have the survey.

Lincoln: Move the question.

Roz: Second.

Elan: Question is moved.

SEE VOTE 15 BELOW. Constitutionally Mandated Club Interest Survey – MOTION PASSES: 16-6-4.

VII. Unfinished Business (9:52 PM)

A. Textbook Affordability

http://pirg.org/highered/highered.asp?id2=11995&id3=highered

Luke: There is a tendency to create new editions of books every couple of years with no significant change of information. This undermines organizations such as The Option which enables students to get some of their money back.

Mihailis: Why is the approach to attack textbook companies and not ask the professors to use older editions?

Luke: Professors can’t know that there are enough used books in The Option for the students in the class to buy it. Also, they don’t know if the textbook company is selling enough older editions. For a lot of classes it is not a feasible thing to order all used books.

Lincoln: I like the fact that they are using market mechanisms, but you were also looking at legislation?

Luke: No you can’t legislate this. You can’t tell a company that they can’t publish a new textbook every couple of years because that is a clear violation of the First Amendment.

Roz: Are you asking us to endorse this proposal?

Luke: I am asking you to sign on as a coalition partner in the campaign.

Marco: I motion to endorse this campaign.

Gloria: Second.

Caleb: Call the question.

MOTION PASSES.

 

VIII. New Business (10:06PM)

A. Matt’s amendments

Matt: Motion to reintroduce the constitutional amendments we had tabled.

Roz: Second.

MOTION PASSES.

1. Banning Speech Night
Due to lack of interest and attendance, speech night shall be abolished
in all forms by striking of all Section V, sub-section F, paragraph 4
Matt: Half of the candidates didn’t show up.

Levan: I don’t age that speech night is useless. Writing my speech helped me realize why I wanted to run for office. Getting rid of speech night would make the elections lose credibility.

Matt: Motion to pass the amendment.

Ethan: Second.

Matt: Students will still have to write a 100 word statement that is published by The Student. No one goes to speech night and that is a sad truth. Two people came to watch.

Ian: Is there a discrepancy between freshmen speech night and speech night this semester?

Matt: Attendance has been going down throughout the year.

Elan: This is a constitutional amendment so it will have to go on the ballot.

Christian: The reason people don’t go to speech night is because we have it in the worst dorm on campus. A lot of people showed up when we had it in the theater. No one wants to see me speak in the basement of James. People that write their speeches are really dedicated to the positions they are running for. People that don’t show up to speech night should be crossed off. Speech night is more interactive.

Richa: I agree. We had speech night and it was pretty pitiful. A lot of that is that there isn’t a lot of hype around it. If we are going to get students to come we have to do something. I don’t think giving up is the way to make a change.

Ethan: This will not eliminate speech night; it will just end it from being mandated by the constitution. Call the question.

Dan: Speech night should be mandated because this kind of stuff, public speaking etc, is what is required to be a senator.

SEE VOTE 16 BELOW. Banning Speech Night - MOTION FAILS: 8-16-1.

2. Banning Run-offs
Change Section V, sub-section G, paragraph 1(a) to "Candidates must win
a 50% of the vote to win, unless there were fewer than four candidates
running, in which case the person receiving the most votes shall be the
winner."
Matt: The current system has a runoff. The candidate winning the majority would win the election with the new election. I think it is inefficient to have a second runoff. We are ridiculed because we have so many elections.

Richa: Second.

Luke: There are a couple of times when this happened and it was a really big issue and the vote changed and was swayed. It made a difference and there was significant value in getting somebody who was a majority winner. I think we may want to have a discussion on apathy but I think there are really good reasons why you want to get a majority.

Christian: I think we shouldn’t pass this amendment. I agree with Luke.

Ryan: If it were just in the case of two people I could see this working. In the case where there are more than 2 people running, you don’t want 35% to be enough.

Lincoln: Move the question.

Roz: Second.

Elan: Question is moved.

SEE VOTE 17 BELOW. Banning Run-off Elections - MOTION FAILS: 8-16-2.

3. Ban Computers
Due to lack of availability, the voting booth will no longer be
mandatory.
Section V, sub-section F, paragraph 8
If feasible, an online voting station shall be made available to the
Student Body from
11AM to 2PM and from 5PM to 7PM on the elections day
in the Weiller Wing of Valentine. Poll officers in Valentine shall be
Election Committee members and are not allowed to influence votes. This
includes reminding voters of write-in candidates.

Roz: Second

Matt: There aren’t computers to have voting booths in Valentine. The old computers we used were from the math department but their chargers are all used up.

Ian: Call the question.

SEE VOTE 18 BELOW. Making computer policy optional - MOTION PASSES: 23-3-0.

B. Spring Formal

Roz: Motion to take Spring Formal off the table.

Mihailis: Second

MOTION PASSES.

Roz: The BC has been more specific about wanting information about the Spring Formal and at this point, if I don’t have a definitive answer from the student government there is less of a chance that it will happen.

Eric: It was decided that SPAB wants to endorse the formal and we would like to work with Roz. You are going to have the people that are in charge of programming on campus working on it. I am basically here to answer any questions the Senate has. The chairs of SPAB are going to try to make sure this will happen. I have seen Roz’s budget and I don’t see what the problem is. There is a reason why SoCo and Program Board are in the master general fund. You need to have that flexibility and so you can’t tie the cost down for this event.

Mira: There are certain things that you can talk about. As Eric said, you have to get the money and tell them what you have before you can tell them what to do. We gave $800 dollars to some 10 person philosophy thing. Lots of people go to the formal and as much as you think it is a waste of money, more people go to Spring Formal than any other event on campus. We have to support certain things and this is one of the things we need to support. We need to get the ball rolling for this to happen. We complain that Amherst doesn’t have traditions and this is one of the few it has.

Mihailis: Point of information – If we approve the money now, it would go to referendum to the students right?

Elan: Correct.

Ethan: The main question I have is about the band. What if the band is not available?

Roz: I will find that information out tomorrow.

Ethan: So the price could change if the band is not available.

Roz: I will tell Chris Barber what my budget is and we will find one for that price.

Ethan: If you want a band that is more expensive wouldn’t you rather have more leeway?

Eric: She is allowed to reallocate.

Matt: I move to commend this back to the BC.

Ethan: Second.

Matt: The BC had two main questions. One was who the band was and how much will they cost and two was what the approximate costs for food would be. This question really only relies on time to resolve. It is not that difficult to just wait a little bit. The BC will vote on the appropriate numbers.

Lincoln: I always get a little nervous when someone says a complex issue is simple. This has to be a flexible budget and we have a pretty good idea of what the numbers are in the past. The other issue that concerns me is that we have already delayed this quite a long time. Second, ultimately we created an amendment that said that any allocation of this amount of money has to go to the student body. The purpose of doing this is not to put up extra barriers but is to say that the Senate may not want to make this decision. We want the students themselves to make this decision.

Jin-Young: I completely agree with Lincoln. I don’t think every single member wants it to go to the BC.

Jim: Move the question.

Roz: Second

Elan: Question is moved.

Committing Spring Formal to BC – Motion fails.

Paris: This is the largest event I have seen and I really like the formal and want it to be successful. When this request was submitted a few weeks ago there was a specific request made and there has been no answer to that request. The band had not even been contracted. We don’t know who the band is and they haven’t been contacted. This allocation is more than 25% of the allocations we give for clubs for the semester. We don’t know what we are serving or what the theme is going to be. The point is that all of the numbers are based on last year and we know that last year was a complete debacle. There are senators here who joined for this specific issue. Obviously those numbers were off. I have sent out a detailed questionnaire and we have gotten no response. We tabled this last week because we needed more information. Since then we have gotten no information. How can you justify to your constituents who planned months in advance for their clubs that we are going to give out of what we gave to them just because we trust them? We need to hold this group to any group standard. We said no to clubs because of all of these logistical things.

Lincoln: The issues we are dealing with here are that mainly this is not your ordinary event, this is not your ordinary club. There are risks involved in putting on an event of this magnitude. The formal brings together s of the student body and I think this is an investment worth making. In order to this it has to get moving.

Ian: I think the most important thing Paris pointed out is that the Senate overwhelmingly voted to table the request because there was a lack of information and we don’t have any more information now.

Mihailis; I think a lot of the reasons why this was tabled was because the meeting went on for 2 1/2hours. It wasn’t necessarily because of a lack of information. I would like to remind everyone that the money we are allocating is less than what we gave the Ski Team. A vote in the Senate sends it to the students to vote. In so far as the food and band issue, it seems like we are trying to micromanage the event. It seems like if this band isn’t available there will be another one for the same cost.

Matt: Point of general privilege – if the students vote no, the allocation is 0.

Dave: A few weeks ago we did pass the amendment to have requests over $14000 to go to the student body and I think we should honor that sentiment by letting the students vote on this.

Preston: It seems like we made an estimate with FLICS based on an average of 2 years and it seems like we can do the same with the Spring Formal.

Marco: I think we need to respect the people that have come to us tonight that need a decision now.

Stephen: We have seen two spring formals and I trust that they know what they are doing. We are asking them to wait until the last minute if we keep stalling on them.

Mira: Can this go on Thursday’s ballot?

Elan: No, it is treated as a referendum.

Dan: I think the point of the amendment is that once the Senate deems the expenditure worthwhile it then goes to the students. The amount of money that we spend on huge events seems really disproportionate. It feels like the big complaint is that there is so much money for things described as frivolous. A lot of people said they just wanted to dance, hear some good music, and dress up. It seems like there is going to be a lot of controversy over such a large amount of money. If there is some way that this could come back with a reduced price the students may not look at it as negatively.

Paris: Point of order – what goes on the thing people vote on?

Elan: It is going to be whatever we pass.

Rania: The arguments I have been hearing against passing this is that we don’t have enough information. I don’t think it our job to plan the event. That should be left to SPAB. The Spring Formal Planning Committee does not have a contract but they can’t really do that until we allocate the money. Also, they are going to get another band if they can’t get this one. I think concessions can be made for events that are this big. We need to look at the big picture.

Matt: Move the question.

Lincoln: Second.

Elan: Question is moved.

SEE VOTE 19 BELOW. $14305 allocation to the Spring Formal – MOTION PASSES: 18-7-1.

Matt: Do you support spending $14305.00 on the Spring Formal?

Eric: Is it possible to offer the students a lower alternative?

Elan: No.

Mira: I think it would be good to put general line items.

Dan: We can agree on the motion we just passed and then have auxillary stuff after that.

Elan: Under the question we can put the general line item.

Jin-Young: Can we have a survey that says, “Do you want a Spring Formal?”

Lincoln: It would make more sense to phrase it as “Do you want a Spring Formal? If yes, the senate has recommended $14305 allocated. If no, the senate will allocate $0.”

Matt: The program we are using is not very friendly to formatting. The alternative method is an html page.

Lincoln: Because I think it is deceptive to say do you want to spend $14305, I think it is more appropriate to say do you want a Spring Formal and then tell them what yes means and what no means. I propose this amendment: Do you support a spring formal, yes or no. Yes would explain $14305 and no would indicate $0.

Luke: Second.

Lincoln: If we want to present this question as honest and as straightforward as possible we need to say yes or no, and if you want it this is what it costs.

Richa: I think there is a difference between saying do you recommend an allocation of $14305 or do you recommend $0? They are not voting on having the event, they are voting on our allocation of $14305.

Dan: What makes it impossible for the event to occur for $9,999 or less?

Roz: $3900 is not possible for food, band, and decoration.

Elan: Maybe it should say, in accordance with its bylaws (post text of bylaws), the senate has recommended $14305 to be allocated to the Spring Formal, do you support this allocation, yes or no.

Mihailis: Is there anyway to put on there the line item breakdown?

Elan: Yes.

Marco: Motion to approve Elan’s amendment.

Ian: Second.

Luke: It seems like both because it doesn’t add up and we don’t want to bind people to things, we should try to post the request everywhere but we just keep it what Elan has just said and vote on it.

Paris: Point of information – in the bylaws, does it say that in a vote of no they can resubmit?

Elan: No.

Mihailis: If the student body votes yes, we are writing them a blank check right?

Elan: Yes.

Paris: If the band isn’t found in two weeks, the money goes back to the BC.

Mihailis: I just think we should have a line item.

Paris: Who is going to write that? It was initially submitted and all of those numbers were revised.

Mihailis: Can we just get the general description?

Paris: Yes.

Dan: Whatever they are passing is what we just voted on.

Elan: If they support the Senate’s allocation then we have to go off of what was recommended to the Senate.

Mihailis: I don’t think the Senate voted for the lump sum but for the sums in each thing.

Elan: Reallocation sums have to be approved by the treasurer.

Rania: It seems that people would want a link with the itemized budget. Can I make an amendment to have a link that has the itemized budget that adds up to $14305?
Elan: Yes.

Dave: I would like to amend to add a link that has the itemized budget that adds up to $14305. Can we just get a cliff note version?

Elan: Yes.

Mihailis: Second.

Elan: Do you want to include the 0s?

Dan: Yes.

Elan: The cliff notes is on the face, not a link.

Rania: Call the question.

SEE VOTE 20 BELOW. Spring Formal Referendum Wording – MOTION PASSES: 24-1-1.

Luke: Motion to commit the actual numbers to the BC.

Richa: Second.

MOTION PASSES.

 

IX. Adjournment (11:19 PM)

 

ROLL CALL VOTES

13

$348 Increase Amendment for ACF Speaker Travel Expense

 

14

2/23/04 BC Funding Recs as Amended

 

 

 

15

Constitutionally Mandated Club Interest Survey

 

16

Banning Speech Night

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17

Banning Run-off Elections

 

 

 

 

 

 

18

Making Computer Polling Optional

 

 

 

 

19

$14,305 allocation to the Spring Formal

 

 

 

20

Spring Formal Referendum Wording

 

 

 

Y = Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N = No

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A = Abstention

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/ = Not Present for Vote

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SENIOR SENATORS

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Jim Beck

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Kay Bradley

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Miahilis Diamantis

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Lincoln Mayer

Y

Y

A

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Preston Scheiner

Y

Y

A

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Luke Swarthout

N

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JUNIOR SENATORS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ethan Davis

Y

Y

Y

A

A

Y

N

/

Rosalyn Foster

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

A

Y

Jin-Young Kim

A

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Arpan Podduturi

N

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Daniel Reiss

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

Christian Sanchez

A

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

David Scherr

N

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Justin Sharaf

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SOPHOMORE SENATORS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rania Arja

N

Y

A

/

N

Y

Y

Y

Taamiti Bankole

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Caleb Deats

N

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

John Lian

N

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Stephen Scriber

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Mira Serrill-Robins

N

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Ian Shin

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

N

Y

Matt Vanneman

N

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

N

N

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FRESHMEN SENATORS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Richa Bhala

N

Y

Y

N

A

Y

N

Y

Avi Das

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Noah Isserman

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Marco Locascio

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Gloria Monfrini

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

N

Y

Levan Moulton

Y

Y

N

N

Y

N

N

Y

Christina Ryu

Y

Y

A

N

N

Y

Y

Y

Jacob Thomas

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

 

Vote conducted by email from 2/25/04 at 5:00 pm to 2/26/04 at 10:00 am

21

E-mail Vote to increase Spring Formal Allocations by $500 to $14,805.

 

SENIOR SENATORS

21

Jim Beck

Y

Kay Bradley

Y

Miahilis Diamantis

Y

Lincoln Mayer

Y

Preston Scheiner

Y

Luke Swarthout

Y

 

 

JUNIOR SENATORS

 

Ethan Davis

N

Rosalyn Foster

A

Jin-Young Kim

Y

Arpan Podduturi

/

Daniel Reiss

/

Christian Sanchez

Y

David Scherr

Y

Justin Sharaf

Y

 

 

SOPHOMORE SENATORS

 

Rania Arja

/

Taamiti Bankole

Y

Caleb Deats

Y

John Lian

Y

Stephen Scriber

Y

Mira Serrill-Robins

Y

Ian Shin

Y

Matt Vanneman

Y

 

 

FRESHMEN SENATORS

 

Richa Bhala

/

Avi Das

/

Noah Isserman

Y

Marco Locascio

Y

Gloria Monfrini

N

Levan Moulton

/

Christina Ryu

Y

Jacob Thomas

Y