Published Jan. 28, 2009 by The Current Sauce
A technicality forced SGA Chief Justice Kyle Domangue to push back the date for a hearing about the constitutionality of the controversial executive board scholarship bill.
As required by the SGA constitution, Domangue must submit a letter detailing the time, location and subject of such a hearing to everyone whose name is on the bill.
Domangue sent letters to many members of the SGA - including President Cody Bourque - but failed to send it to Dean of Students Chris Maggio.
"That's my fault, and I'll take responsibility for that," Domangue said.
Bill FA08-030 reduced the scholarships of the executive board by a substantial amount.
The president receives $3,000, the vice president $2,000 and the treasurer $1,000 per semester according to the legislation.
But some members of the SGA, including Austin Jesmore, argue that the bylaw is in violation of Article 9, Section 1, part D of the constitution, which states that a two-thirds vote is required for all bills with the exception of a vote concerning the media board and the executive board scholarship.
These two exceptions require a student body vote of approval, according to that section of the constitution.
"The constitution directly forbids that action that they took," Jesmore said.
Bourque explained that the scholarship cuts would give money back to the students and the SGA budget.
"My main reason for supporting it is that it really locks down the budget. You know exactly what you're going to be spending on scholarships," Bourque said.
In addition to debating the constitutionality of the bill, those present at the meeting briefly discussed the possibility of including a definition of the phrase "fiscal year" in the constitution to clarify exactly when the fiscal year begins and ends.
Jesmore said this clarification would protect the current executive board so that if, halfway through a semester, the senate decided to cut the board's scholarships, it would not affect those in office.
"We wanted to take this hit instead of next year's editorial board," Bourque said.
He said the debate was no longer about whether the bill was right or wrong. Now, it's up to the students of NSU to decide.
"I will totally be in support of whatever decision the student body makes," Bourque said in an interview.
Domangue said the constitution clearly states that the scholarship reduction is unacceptable without a student body vote.
He also said he understood the executive board's reasons for wanting the scholarships to change.
"That's very commendable, but at the same time, it's just the legality," Domangue said. "I'm not aiming to please the senate or the SGA, I'm aiming to please the students."
Jesmore said the SGA must amend the constitution, remove the clause, have a student body vote and pass the bill through the student senate in order to change the scholarships.
The scholarships were originally implemented to keep members of the executive board focused on their jobs in the SGA, Jesmore said.
The new hearing will take place Tuesday at 8 p.m. in room 320 of the Friedman Student Union.
As required by the SGA constitution, Domangue must submit a letter detailing the time, location and subject of such a hearing to everyone whose name is on the bill.
Domangue sent letters to many members of the SGA - including President Cody Bourque - but failed to send it to Dean of Students Chris Maggio.
"That's my fault, and I'll take responsibility for that," Domangue said.
Bill FA08-030 reduced the scholarships of the executive board by a substantial amount.
The president receives $3,000, the vice president $2,000 and the treasurer $1,000 per semester according to the legislation.
But some members of the SGA, including Austin Jesmore, argue that the bylaw is in violation of Article 9, Section 1, part D of the constitution, which states that a two-thirds vote is required for all bills with the exception of a vote concerning the media board and the executive board scholarship.
These two exceptions require a student body vote of approval, according to that section of the constitution.
"The constitution directly forbids that action that they took," Jesmore said.
Bourque explained that the scholarship cuts would give money back to the students and the SGA budget.
"My main reason for supporting it is that it really locks down the budget. You know exactly what you're going to be spending on scholarships," Bourque said.
In addition to debating the constitutionality of the bill, those present at the meeting briefly discussed the possibility of including a definition of the phrase "fiscal year" in the constitution to clarify exactly when the fiscal year begins and ends.
Jesmore said this clarification would protect the current executive board so that if, halfway through a semester, the senate decided to cut the board's scholarships, it would not affect those in office.
"We wanted to take this hit instead of next year's editorial board," Bourque said.
He said the debate was no longer about whether the bill was right or wrong. Now, it's up to the students of NSU to decide.
"I will totally be in support of whatever decision the student body makes," Bourque said in an interview.
Domangue said the constitution clearly states that the scholarship reduction is unacceptable without a student body vote.
He also said he understood the executive board's reasons for wanting the scholarships to change.
"That's very commendable, but at the same time, it's just the legality," Domangue said. "I'm not aiming to please the senate or the SGA, I'm aiming to please the students."
Jesmore said the SGA must amend the constitution, remove the clause, have a student body vote and pass the bill through the student senate in order to change the scholarships.
The scholarships were originally implemented to keep members of the executive board focused on their jobs in the SGA, Jesmore said.
The new hearing will take place Tuesday at 8 p.m. in room 320 of the Friedman Student Union.
