Hi All,
Here are the comments we've already received in-class:
1) There was a suggestion to keep the backup LEG plan.
2) The amendment regarding the impeachment process will be further discussed over this blogger and be voted on separately tomorrow.
3) The amendments regarding the speaker of LEG council and his/her responsibilities will be further discussed over this blogger and be voted on separately tomorrow
If you have any further comments/questions that you would like addressed, Adhiv will be working with Matthew so that he can answer some of your questions/address your concerns via this blogger himself.
We do NOT have a lot of time tomorrow during brunch for full-blown discussion—at most, we will be able to host a Q&A for our presenter. Therefore, please make sure to comment anything you'd like to discuss below, TONIGHT!
Thank you.
Hello! I'll be answering any questions you might have on here before the brunch meeting tomorrow :)
ReplyDeleteSome quick comments -
1) Personally I don't think it's necessary (as the current plan has worked very well for ~2 years), but since it's just a housekeeping amendment I'm fine with leaving the backup plan in!
2) Feel free to bring up any questions here - the main goal was to make it more *possible* to impeach someone while still extremely difficult. One change to the amendment I was considering was to require a simple majority vote of the student body even if LEG & EC vote super majority, would that help with any concerns?
3) Ditto here! For clarification, ideally we would have the original ASB/admin council pick commissioners and everything like that and then just get that approved through LEG, but unfortunately I don't think it would be a good idea to present to 40-odd people why certain people were picked and certain people weren't. Instead, having the Speaker on these committees allows for some LEG oversight (and thus more direct student input) without opening up issues of public bashing/etc.
One more clarification - Speaker nominations must be approved by the ASBOs before being nominated/voted on.
Looking forward to hearing your comments/feedback/concerns tonight!
Thanks,
Matthew
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteOn a slightly more personal note -
DeleteI know there has been some discussion about how representative the Legislative Council really is, especially since members have not been directly elected for the past two years - even to the point of considering a move back to the old system.
As a four-year Rep who has experienced the direct Leg elections, I would like to warn against going back to the old system. I can tell you from personal experience that most reps were chosen by nose-goes or similar "random" games, which showed itself quite clearly in the lack of dedication most representatives had to the Council.
In fact, there was so little dedication that we struggled continously to meet quorum. And I don't mean "struggle" in the sense of it took an extra 5 minutes to chat people to come like we "struggled" this year. No, "struggle" as in we had to cancel meeting after meeting because we simply didn't have enough LEG reps who cared. And most of the ones who did show up mostly saw it as a quiet place to do homework and get a free cookie once the meeting was over.
Of course, the current system has its issues, but it is in my opinion leagues ahead of that. Representatives consistently show up, they take their position seriously, and they present to their classes on a regular basis.
There are concerns about reps being appointed, which is why one of the amendments I proposed gives classes the choice at the beginning of the year to either elect their own representative or choose to have one assigned to them. Additionally, they can choose to revoke their assigned rep at any point during the year, which gives homerooms even more power than they had in the old system.
I truly believe that the proposed system (giving homerooms the choice whether to elect their own rep or have one assigned) gives the ideal balance between direct elections (where students are forced to rep - or just blow the whole thing off - even if they don't care at all) and the current system (where homerooms have no say over how they are represented). In fact, the amendment proposed gives homerooms complete choice over who represents them while ensuring the representatives are responsible about their duties.
But even if you reject every one of my amendments, I really hope that going back to the previous system is not seen as a good alternative.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHey Matthew,
ReplyDeleteI like some of the things that you mentioned like some of the cleaning up that you proposed, but I have a few questions about other things. (PS they aren't written as questions but for every point I am wondering why it should be passed)
For the incoming freshman class officers, I don’t see why LEG council will vote on that. All of them are democratically elected and the only reason why they need an interview is to choose their positions. Not only does Executive Council not vote on these matters, none of the ASBOs did for the next year either. I don’t see why the Speaker and LEG council needs to vote on that.
I also do not see why the Speaker need to be on the panel to choose commissioners. In my opinion commissioners should only be decided by ASBOs since they’ll be in a class together, while the Speaker is not.
While I’m a bit iffy on the Speaker, because of its wide roles, I can understand why you would propose this. Also, I might be wrong on this but, nowhere in the constitution does it say that the Speaker has to be a LEG rep. It even says that in the constitution: “Although they may not act as voting members, class officers and other members of the Executive Council may preside at all Legislative Council meetings. Members may place items on the Legislative Council agenda and present to the Legislative Council with the consent of the ASB Officer team” That means that theoretically,if this passed, I could go to the second meeting, a LEG rep member nominates me I could be a non-voting non-LEG rep Speaker.
I would have to agree with Stephen on this. Personally, if the language is revised to fix Stephen's loophole, I am personally open to the idea of having a speaker of LEG. The speaker would run the administrative duties of LEG, and take away some of the responsibility that the ASBOs currently have. Also, I think that the 1/3 LEG council vote to add something to the agenda is good, as there are now multiple avenues to get something on there.
DeleteHowever, I also agree with Stephen that in its current state, the amendment gives the speaker way too much influence and oversight, arguably almost more than the ASB president. Stephen basically sums up my concerns about the commissioner panel and the freshmen panels. I would also like to add that because the speaker is not democratically elected by the student body, then I do not think that they should have any influence on the ASBO team as well, even if they are a non-voting member.
That being said, I am very open to hearing potential alternatives, because I think that at its core this idea has potential, and it would give LEG council a more significant role. Thank you.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteOops it didn't specify that it came from me. -Ben
DeleteHi Stephen! Thanks so much for the comments - I'll go through them in the order received:
Delete1 - (Panel to decide incoming freshman class officers:)
I think I'm misunderstanding what you mean when you say "none of the ASBOs did for the next year either" - the constitution is clear that the panel to decide freshman class officer positions includes a representative of the ASB Officers (the ASB President).
My argument for why LEG should have some representation on that panel is that in general LEG represents something different from ASB - direct, real-time student input. That is a valuable perspective that isn't presented well by either the ASB president or any of the other members of that panel.
I think, however, that it does make sense to have the Speaker only be on the panel as an advisory role (similar to their role on the E.C.), and I will modify the proposed amendments to include that. That way they will not be able to actually vote, but will be able to present what I believe is a unique viewpoint on the panel.
2 - Essentially ditto here, I believe LEG represents a unique viewpoint because the representatives are held directly accountable to and communicate with the entire student body every week.
I will also modify this amendment so that the Speaker only serves a non-voting role, in the hopes that that allows them to present that unique viewpoint without necessarily encroaching on the ASBOs choice.
3 - Real quick here, I would like to point out that even if all of the Speaker-on-committee-X amendments are voted against, I still believe just having a Speaker to help organize the logistical side of LEG is a positive change (and thus would hope everyone considers voting for the "main" Speaker amendment even if they vote against all the smaller Speaker-on-committee amendments).
4 - Thanks for that catch - I've updated the amendment with a line that clarifies the Speaker must be an active member of the Legislative Council!
I would also like to clarify that it's not necessarily as simple as "a LEG rep member nominates me I could be a non-voting non-LEG rep Speaker" - the ASBOs must approve your nomination (which is an important check on the process that I want to highlight in case it happened to be missed anywhere).
Hopefully those help clarify my goals with these amendments, and I hope the modifications I'm making (the Speaker serving a non-voting/advisory role on the two committees in question and clarifying that the Speaker must be a LEG Rep) help address your concerns.
Thanks,
Matthew
Hey Ben!
DeleteThanks for the feedback - I've revised the language to clarify that the Speaker must be an active Legislative Representative.
I also agree - even if the Speaker does absolutely nothing else, just helping to take some of the logistical burden of LEG off of the ASBOs would be a great help. And of course I also agree that having additional ways of placing items on the agenda is helpful :)
I have also modified the amendments so that the Speaker only has a non-voting role on the two committees in question (to assign freshman officer positions and to assign commissioners), so hopefully that helps to address some concerns about the power they have.
I would however be curious why you believe that the Speaker might have "arguably almost more than the ASB president" - to the best of my knowledge, all of the committees I've proposed the Speaker be on either include the ASB President or include a "representative of the ASB Officers" (which could be the president if he or she so chooses).
I would also like to point out that I personally consider the Speaker to be democratically elected by the student body, just not necessarily directly elected. With the new homeroom oversight amendment, each homeroom either elects their own representative or votes to have one assigned to them, which means that all representatives have the democratic support of their portion of the student body. Then the Council (consisting of democratically selected representatives) votes a Speaker. It's not a direct election of the Speaker, but every student on campus has representation in the vote.
Again - I sincerely hope that the two changes I'm making to the amendments (giving the Speaker a non-voting role on the committees in question and clarifying that the Speaker must be a Leg Rep) help to address your concerns!
Thanks again for the feedback,
Matthew
Hey Matthew,
ReplyDeleteTo clarify, even though the constitution says that the ASB president can decide freshman class officers, in practice for the next year it was just The leadership advisor and Mrs. Butterworth. So putting the Speaker wouldn't just me unnecessary but also not followed by the admin. LOL
To rebut to your former statement, I am confused on your opinion on LEG rep. You mentioned that in the old system, people would play random games like "noes-goes". So can I infer that most people, will want a LEG member appointed to them. That means that not only do the ASBOs choose the members who vote on the Speaker, the ASBOS choose who can be on the ballot. That type of Soviet-style election does not seem democratically elected to me.
I can't speak for Ben, but here's why I think with the previous unedited amendments, the Speaker would be more powerful than the ASB president.
1. The Speaker's "electorate" is ~44 students plus the 9 ASBOs, while the ASB president is ~1,300 students .
2. The Speaker is on par with the ASB President in terms of being in both Councils of ASB. The ASB President is an unvoting advisory role from the Leadership Class to LEG rep. The only difference is that the ASB President can hold emergency meetings to both councils. (Primarily for the Executive)
3. The Speaker, beforehand, could choose who would be in the Leadership Class, giving it seniority over all class officers and commissioners. (Basically an ASBO)
4. The Speaker can vote on which freshman class officer gets what position. (Only given to the ASB President, but not this year for weird reasons)
It seems like the Speaker is on par with the ASB President without the work does in the Leadership Class and the work on class office affairs. On top of that the the Speaker only needs to sway only < 32 people to get the positon. (Everything is simple majority).
Even though having the speaker as a non-voting role is better than a voting role, I don't see a point in the Speaker having that position. I wish all class officers have that kind of positon in voting for freshman class officers so iIdon't see why the Speaker should have these kinds of privileges.
Also another thing is For the back-up of the LEG rep plan, it is solely there as a back-up not as a primary way to elect LEG rep members. Even if there are enough people that sign up this year, we can’t be sure for the following years. You mentioned that if there aren’t enough members for LEG rep, then we can just change it however in order to change the constitution you need 66% LEG rep. It’s like a catch-22
Hello,
DeleteThanks for the information!
I wasn't aware that the ASB President wasn't represented in the freshman class officer panel this year - that's interesting, as the constitution does explicitly include them on the panel.
In response to that, I think that I'm looking at the term "democratically elected" from a slightly different light - a better phrase for me to use would probably be that "all Legislative Representatives serve with the *express consent* of their homerooms." With the current system, for example, representatives are completely chosen by ASBOs and homerooms have literally 0 way to express their desires in the process. With the new amendment, at every point in the process homerooms have to choose how they want to be represented, and can always choose to change their representation if they don't believe they are being represented fairly. Thus, I think it is more than fair to say that Representatives have the *consent* to represent their class, even if saying that most of them are "democratically elected" is of questionable meaning.
Additionally, the ASBOs are democratically elected - which is why I didn't have major issues with them approving Speaker nominations. On top of that, if a homeroom votes by simple majority to elect their own representative, the ASBOs cannot do anything about that - it completely sidesteps the entire ASBO Representative approval process, and the homeroom's chosen representative is guaranteed a spot on the Legislative Council.
Thanks for clarifying that position! I do disagree to some extent, but hopefully with the modified amendments of course this is less of an issue.
The argument I would make for the Speaker's inclusion in an advisory role is that the Speaker's entire job, essentially, is to collect direct feedback from his or her homeroom class, and the homeroom classes of the other Legislative Council representatives, and essentially act as the "filtered, up-to-date voice of the Student Body." That is a wholly different perspective than that offered by the ASB President (who is more concerned with the day-to-day operations of the Leadership Class/ASBO team than the student body as a whole) or that of the Administration.
I don't remember mentioning "if there aren’t enough members for LEG rep, then we can just change it" but that was probably in the video and I just forgot LOL...though the point is well-taken and I have modified the amendment to clarify its role as essentially a way to fill any "gap" leftover.
Thanks again, and let me know if you have more comments/questions/feedback!
Thanks,
Matthew
Sorry - I also think it's worth clarifying: to the best of my knowledge the ASB President was logistically unable to be on the committee this year, but there was still significant ASB representation - including the ASB VP (who took his place) and a representative of each Class Officer team.
DeleteMatthew and Stephen,
DeleteFor some clarification on why the ASB President was not present at this year's Freshmen Class Officer interviews: Mrs. Butterworth and Mr. Lee had not sent me any information regarding the logistics concerning the meeting, even though I had emailed Mrs. Butterworth weeks ago asking about it.
When I asked Mrs. Butterworth (in person) about when the meeting was and if I could be apart of the panel, she was adamant about me not being present. I had known that past ASB Presidents were at these meetings but was not aware that the constitution explicitly gave the right for the ASB President to be present at these meetings. I'm assuming that because this is Mrs. Butterworth as AP of activities, as well as Mr. Lee's first year as the Leadership advisor, they were both unaware of how Freshmen CO decisions were run in the past. Additionally, the ASB VP was not present at this meeting, nor any representatives of each CO team. The meeting only consisted of Mr. Lee, Mrs. Butterworth, and the 5 freshmen class officers.
As Stephen mentioned, many of these rights given to the Leg Speaker may not be executed if admin does not follow through due to unavailability or ignoring the Constitution— shown numerous times this past year. I will be bringing up this situation with Mr. Lee and Mrs. Butterworth to ensure that it does not happen in the future.
Please let me know if y'all have any questions!
Quick note - my apologies @Matthew! I meant the ASB President wasn't on the committee for the ratio of freshman officer positions delegated to the different feeder schools. Last year Will and I were a part of the freshmen class officer interviews with Mrs. Badger.
ReplyDeleteI think the changes that Matthew made to the Speaker position being an advisory, non voting member for these committees makes me a lot more comfortable with the idea of him/her being present. It's also important, however, to make sure that the Speaker is legitimately striving to hear the student / leg council concern and represent them appropriately.
The general idea of the Speaker makes Leg council seem a lot more attractive, and I'm sure that it'll attract the eyes of people looking to make their way into impacting ASB and being a part of the culture to make events and ideas happen. If all of this does get passed, it's going to be a task to the new ASBO team next year to make sure that it's implemented well and that people *understand* what all of this means (which should definitely be considered in the vote for these amendments).
I'm on board with most of the fixes being made to the Constitution, along with the idea of having a Speaker of Leg Council, but some of the responsibilities confuse me. I think it makes sense for the Speaker to essentially become in charge of Leg Council, due to the fact that he or she is elected by the members of Leg Council. I however, don't see why the Speaker would need to sit on the panel that chooses Commissioners, the following years' Class Officers, or even why they should be allowed to attend E.C meetings. I think either of these 3 responsibilities allows the responsibilities and influence of the Speaker over the governing body of Lynbrook, to eclipse those of even the ASB President. Other than that though, I think having a Speaker of Leg Council should be allowed to visit E.C when concerning Leg Council changes and matters, and that it is overall a good idea!
ReplyDeleteI definitely like the idea of Speaker of Leg, but I agree with Aayush that the roles and responsibilities confuse me. I don't think they should be on the commission panel because they won't be working directly with the commissioners. Same goes for them being on the freshman class panel! I think ASBOs should work on seeing what roles are best after electing someone next year!!
ReplyDeleteI like most of the amendments proposed by Matthew. The big thing that I saw that needed discussion from this (and we all saw on this thread) was the speaker of Leg. I'd have to agree with Stephen that there seems to be too much power given to the speaker of Leg Council. Then again, the role isn't fully defined out there. I would suggest that the speaker have less jurisdiction over the freshman class officers advisors. From the proposed amendments, it seems that the speaker may or may not have as much power in ASB choices as an assistant principal, and I'm not sure with the speaker's (probably limited) experience in ASB if they'd be suited to choose positions.
ReplyDelete