Minutes 12-20-13 (CB)

CENTRAL BOARD
Room 200 MVP Student Leadership Center Ateneo de Manila University, Loyola Heights 0916 750 6661 | sanggusecgen@gmail.com
CENTRAL BOARD MEETING Date: December 20, 2013
Venue: MVP 200 Time: 4:45pm to 8:45pm
AGENDA (underlined = to be continued, italics = postponed/deferred): 1) Approval of minutes c/o AJ Elicao (5mins) 2) Budget Hearing c/o Tin and SOM (15mins) 3) Buklod Atenista resolution c/o Ray Gomez (10mins) 4) CEA Report c/o Juno Reyes (10mins) 5) Privilege Speech by Dan Remo (10mins) 6) Constitutional Amendment Process c/o OVP ATTENDANCE (underlined = absent, italics = late/early departure, * = non-voting): Daniel Antonio S. Remo President Ryan Carl Y. Yu Vice-President Antonio Rafael N. Elicao Secretary-General Kristine Mae B. Andujare Finance Officer Michaella Paula M. Aldea3 COA President Von Vincent Rene A. Cruz5 ARSA President Jose Norberto V. Reyes 3 SOH Central Board Rep Nina Louise J. Atienza 2 SOH Central Board Rep Rocyl Marie Sangalang4 1 SOH Central Board Rep Michael Xavier C. Tobias*6 SOSE Secretary-Treasurer Pamela Anne M. Gaerlan 2 SOSE Central Board Rep Camille C. Diez 1 SOSE Central Board Rep Redentor John R. Dimla*1 SOH Chairperson Jose Javier V. Poe IV* JGSOM Chairperson Larisse Jem H. Mondok2 4 JGSOM Central Board Rep Luis Miguel D. De Jesus 3 JGSOM Central Board Rep Ray Cristofer C. Gomez 2 JGSOM Central Board Rep Jared Matthew A. Sarmiento 1 JGSOM Central Board Rep Marvin T. Lagonera7* SOSS Secretary-Treasurer Abelardo G. Hernandez8 2 SOSS Central Board Rep Samantha Nicole M. Warren 1 SOSS Central Board Rep
1 2
Proxied by Juno Reyes. Proxied by JV Poe. 3 Proxied by Carlo Yacob. 4 Proxied by Ejay Domingo. 5 Proxied later by Abbo Hernandez. 6 Proxied by Pam Gaerlan. 7 On LOA. 8 Proxied by Ilkka Ruso.
CENTRAL BOARD
MINUTES Approval of Agenda Motion to approve agenda by 4 SOM CB, seconded by 1 SOSS CB. Motion approved unanimously
Approval of Minutes Elicao: You know the drill. Motion to approve minutes by 3 SOH CB, seconded by 1 SOSE CB. Minutes approved unanimously.
Budget Hearing Andujare: Only unit proposing is SOM, for urgency. Other submitted proposals will present in January. Remind everyone of cap costs. SOM presenting for a redesigned project. Remo: First meeting will be on January 10. Tanjangco: Presenting for Math 19 tutorials, SOM Games, redesigned project. Math 19 TutorialsP6,900.00 SOM GamesP35,630.00 Most materials are logistical, referees, trophies, medals, lights for Cov Courts, basic materials like IDs, food for techs, etc. Cruz: Sponsors give prizes? Tanjangco: Depends. For run, if a certain number of people cross the finish line, donate this much to Loyola College of Culion. Bazaar for LS-SOMBAP50,000.00 Booth subsidy. From seniors, redesigned project from first semester. Nature is much like Sanggu grants, but specific to SOMBA and LS 100 classes, bazaar required for them. Poe: Additional context: typical bazaar ranges from P10k to P15k for rent per person. Andujare: For tutorials, how many students? Co: 30x6 for midterm, same for final. Andujare: So 180 students for midterm and the same for final? 2
CENTRAL BOARD
Co: Up to them whether they want to repeat. Andujare: How many Math 19 takers? Co: Some still taking Math 11, might modify to accommodate them. Warren: No need, SOSS will do Math 11 tutorials. Andujare: Freshmen in general, whenever you do a tutorial, it's open to the entire batch? How inclusive is this to those taking Math 19? How many people are enrolled in a Math 19 class? Do you need to recalibrate the number? Okay with increasing as long as the students use it. Co: Considering. Motion to approve Math 19 tutorials budget by 1 SOSE CB, seconded by 2 SOSE CB. Budget approved unanimously. Andujare: For SOM Games, those amounts for referees were provided by? Tanjangco: Based on previous years. Andujare: Not a typical tarp size, given the price? Poe: 13.5x10. Andujare: Have you checked the stockroom for the materials? Tanjangco: Haven't. Remo: Scrap first and repropose? Poe: We can cover. Andujare: Keep it there then check? Poe: Rather get less. Andujare: Borrow first aid kid from LSHS. Chalk and erasers can be borrowed. Budget amended (scrapping art paper, chalk, first aid kit) to P35,335.00. Motion to approve SOM Games budget by VP, seconded by 1 SOSS CB. Objection by FO. Andujare: POI. For that amount, 73 people need to pay SAF. For everyone's information. Objection withdrawn. Budget approved unanimously. Andujare: I am confused with the LS-SOMBA. Disintegration from centralized SSS? Why is there a need? Can't it be included in central? It's there, SOM kids haven't been applying. Poe: Also want to get LS Dept involved. Andujare: Can be fixed. Are there any other issues? Poe: None. Wanted something specific. Andujare: How many groups are you planning to subsidize? Poe: Three to five. Support would be helpful. Andujare: Recommend scrap, integrate. Poe: Is there enough money in SSS? Tanjangco: And they need to execute by January. Doable? Poe: If there are no problems, can we get SOM reps involved? 3
CENTRAL BOARD
Andujare: Discuss outside the meeting. But we can integrate. Proposal withdrawn. Remo: Conclude final budget hearing of 2013. Other units will propose in January.
Buklod Atenista Resolution Gomez: In Ateneo de Cagayan, they are imposing a "no permit, no exam" policy. If you haven't paid tuition in full before exam, you need to get a permit. If no permit, no exam, even if CHED Memorandum banning this kind of policy. Phasesinformation gathering, discussion with their administration. Not useful to us; we have to vote. Consulting the body. Remo: The "no permit, no exam" university has been abolished in ADMU thanks to Magna Carta. Warren: So what do we have to do? Gomez: For us to talk to admin to encourage them to talk to XU admin. Andujare: Already asked you thisdo we need to agree on an action plan via resolution? If it's just talking to admin, we can just do that. Why resolution? Gomez: They want a resolution so they can show it to their admin. Andujare: Can't they just dig up the CHED Memorandum? Gomez: Whenever they move, impression that they need resolution. Cruz: What will the piece of paper do? Gomez: I think they think it'll give them more leverage with their admin. I think it should be a stand. Tayo lang hinihintay. Motion to change presidership to FO, seconded by 4 SOM CB. Motion approved unanimously. Reyes: What have the other schools done? Gomez: No response, no approval. Waiting on us to vote. Voting hasn't happened. Remo: Five questions. Firstthere is a resolution drafted in National Assembly, which hasn't been adopted by it? Based on our rules, we can't vote on that yet because it's nonexistent. Gomez: Presenting this. I find it pointless if they approve a resolution at Buklod, and then we shoot it down on our end. Andujare: You represent Sanggu, so we entrust it to your judgment. Convene, decide as a group, then bring it back after. Gomez: This is a special case. Resolution presented online. Usually when they show resolutions, I have a delegation to consult. 4
CENTRAL BOARD
Remo: Have the other schools agreed? Gomez: Have not expressed stands. Remo: Informally? Gomez: None. Remo: Based on your capacity as ambassador, will this pass in National Assembly? Gomez: Yes. Remo: As our Buklod Ambassador, what is your recommendation? Gomez: Solidarity, yes. But need help with Phase 2how to forward if we don't have the problem on our end? Remo: My recommendationwait on ambassadors vote, adopt the resolution as National. Yu: Does Buklod have stands? Gomez: They can. Yu: I get the confusion. Why doesn't it instead take the form of a stand, express support for XU? So we show support but don't have to do anything because it doesn't make sense. Gomez: Agree. Ruso: Solidarity? Andujare: Recommending a different method. Motion to change presidership to VP by Sec-Gen, seconded by President. Motion approved unanimously.
CEA Report Reyes: Presenting formal report regarding meeting with OSA for YES paneling. Agendaorient the pertinent officers regarding duties, address Sanggu-related concerns, make sure that the representatives would be prepared. As of 3:30 earlier today, Musmos has yet to sign up for a slot. Almost all orgs have been distributedonly ones open are COSA and LEAPS. Musmos has yet to give schedule. For applying, only ANI has scheduled. 15 out of the 16 officers have signed up, 16th is on leave of absence. Redistribute if he comes back. Recommendationsdon't ask what they've done, go to OSA facilitators, talk to org presidents already to level off. Presenting to adopt as a formal report. Dimla: Make-up orientation? Reyes: No. But will try to organize calibration session for us so we're leveled off. 5
CENTRAL BOARD
Yu: Presider wishes to remind the body that this is an important responsibility, please cooperate. Remo: 16 officers were chosen by the President in consultation with OSA and CEA Chair. By tradition, usually paneled by seniors, but we don't have enough elected top officer seniors, so we have delegated to a select few undergrads. Big responsibility, you must take it seriously. And also, make it a point to get to know the orgs. Has been expressed to me by several orgs that many officers are unfamiliar with the orgs they're paneling for. Motion to adopt report by Sec-Gen, seconded by 4 SOM CB. Report adopted unanimously.
Privilege Speech by Dan Remo Motion to change presidership to VP by VP, seconded by 1 SOSS CB. Motion approved unanimously.
Remo: Good evening. First off, advanced merry Christmas. Remind everyone of Sanggu-wide Christmas party tomorrow, 6pm. Why did I choose to address you this afternoon? Has been mentioned in the past that we are going through a difficult time as Sanggu. Impeachment trial going on in the next room. Trial has generated questions regarding relevance, importance, the politics that have governed this institution. Scheduled the meeting to coincide with the hearing to change the perspective. The business of the student government will continue. We were all elected under the banner of service. Our term expires on March 8. The process of electing the next batch of officers is upon us. By January 17, we will know the candidates. By mid-February, we will know our successors. Transition by March 9. Make the most of the time left. Make sure that the problems experienced this year do not repeat. The problems of Sanggu have existed and will continue to exist. The role of the Sanggunian will continue, as demonstrated by what we have done, our projects. Lastly, we will be undertaking CAP in a while. It's going to be a very difficult process. We are pressed for time. These structural deficiencies have been around since the foundation of this constitution. Exactly eight years ago, the makers of the current constitution thought they had created a working system. We have come full circle. The legacy of this Central Board will be this process, so please take it seriously. Consult, debate. This process is difficult, but at the end of it, we will emerge a stronger, more efficient, more relevant Sanggunian. Take this chance to wish us luck, and merry Christmas. 6
CENTRAL BOARD
Request that we take a 20min recess to let us stretch our legs. Motion for recess by President, seconded by 1 SOSS CB. Motion approved unanimously. Session resumes at 6:03pm. Remo: Bought food. We will change presidership back so we can recognize the VP for CAP. I realize there is a hearing going on, but focus on this. Motion to return presidership to President by Pres, seconded by 1 SOSS CB. Motion approved unanimously. Remo: Proceed to CAP. Recognize the VP.
CAP Yu: Schedule from COMELEC December 21, January 10, 17, 24, 31. We only have five weeks left. Please reevaluate the priority list. Today, we'll proceed as planned, see how it goes. Hopefully by tonight, ask your constituents, make necessary changes by tomorrow. Okie dokie artichokie? Lucero: Today, discuss preamble. Given homework last week. See how it goes if it takes too long, compromise by next session. But for now, preamble muna. Have a copy of the Constitution. Let's thank Ilkka, presented a good analysis of the preamble. After we discuss clearing the ground, homework is to give actual data. Reyes: Are we planning to incorporate homework? Lucero: Preamble stands as first document for a reason. More than a banner, it is the point of consistency. Declaration of principles. Ruso: When the 1987 Constitution was written and they talked about the preamble, these were principles guiding how the document was to be written. Change the structure to be consistent with the preamble? Lucero: Question is whether this body is content with the preamble as it is now. Ruso: We can't know where we're content with it unless we look at its contents. Lucero: Remember hearing a concern from the CB that a presentation might set up prior expectations. Yu: Team studied throughout first semester, so please do present. 7
CENTRAL BOARD
Ruso: What we have is school jurisprudence. When we make a constitution, have to present rationales. Point of this analysis is that all these things are up for debate, tried to be as unbiased as possible in analyzing. "We, the Undergraduate Students of the Ateneo de Manila Loyola Schools" Clear, only concern is whether exchange students count. Lucero: They don't. "moved by the Holy Spirit to seek God's greater glory" Question of how religiosity is to be expressed. Makes sense to me. Ditch the Holy Spirit part is possible, but the provision is fine. Poe: Sounds presumptuous. Remo: Disagree. Catholic institution, and as student government of a Catholic school, it's not meant to be taken literally but do we subscribe to the ideals, are we moved as prescribed by the university. Poe: Only ones who can claim being moved are Gospel writers and the like. Ruso: Moved by the Ignatian spirit? Reyes: Informed instead of moved? Contention with "moved" is that it's theologically loaded. Poe: Objective of the statement? Lucero: Always include religious affiliation of the group of people. Ateneo context, affirms that we subscribe by the Christian values of the school. Poe: Can we not say subscribing to the Christian values of the school? Reyes: De-load from religious imagery. Yu: Suggestionsinclude St. Ignatius, or "moved to seek God's greater glory?" Warren: Remove. Remo: This goes back to the question of how you view Sanggu. If Sanggu is a co-formator of the student body, removing the spirit necessarily changes that view. These are the principles of the university. I'd rather we leave it at that. Poe: Issue is the wording. I don't mind what it's trying to say. Can we classify wording issues and principle issues? "by avowing our inherent democratic right to pursue an autonomous student government" Absolutely essential, statement of our rights. "that shall inspire us to serve God and nation with self-sacrifice" God is already mentioned, self-sacrifice is strongly worded. "The pursuit of excellence?" "shall lead us into service" 8
CENTRAL BOARD
Elicao: Wording or principle? Here, it says the wording is Gomez: Don't marginalize non-Catholics by including too much. Ruso: Serve the nation? Yu: Issue of the content but also the wording. Don't think it should be talked about here, we're not getting anywhere. "safeguard our dignity" Fairly straightforward. "defend our common interests, promote the students' general welfare" Connotes the idea of a general will, majority overriding the minority. The 1987 Constitution had common good. This mixes both. I think "common welfare" is appropriate. "Welfare" is on the social justice side, "common" is of and by the people. Up for debate. Ruso: One of these needs to be removed. Poe: Does common interests include things not in welfare? Ruso: Essentially synonymous. Reyes: Welfare and interest, the line is that interests are more prone to esotericity. Ruso: Interest is what we're interested in, welfare is more collective. Remo: The libertarian ideological declaration assumes that those interests will be protected. Elicao: That part will be questioned later though. Remo: View on role of Sanggu affects how you view. Yu: Don't change? Andujare: Concern is how we're doing this. There are mini discussions. We're doing this as a board. Focus. Preamble, I don't agree on line by line, but we decided as a board, so we have to sit through it. Remo: Nothing wrong with changing list as it is now. But my earlier question, are there any major issues? If there are, identify the issue. Pulse? Reyes: Section on explicitly libertarian ideals. Ruso: What direction is it leading? Religious? Social justice? Choice for students? What's the balance? "uphold our academic freedom and the integrity of the University" Needs to be clarification whether we mean students or the institution's image. If we are the image of the school rather than an autonomous body, how much autonomy do we have? Integrity of the student body? Integrity of the constituents? Gomez: Student body and not University? 9
CENTRAL BOARD
Lucero: That's the concern. This puts the institution into perspective. If the University says no to RH Bill, and our preamble says we are to be connected, leans towards supporting. Yu: Just says integrity. Ruso: Thinking the MVP issue. Is it in our interest to uphold his name because he's part of the university, or uphold by condemning? Remo: Interpretation has always been to uphold the rules to which we agreed when we become students. Uphold as co-formator. Integrity is rules and bylaws, but the autonomy also is a factor. Elicao: Agree with that, but has to be written out in that case. Ruso: Valuable issues first. "unite the student body" Straightforward. "foster harmony in the academic community" Getting along with everyone, aversion to extreme politicization. Elicao: What does "academic community" imply? Ruso: Has to be specific. Remo: Distinguish between the segments of LS community. Student academic community. Reyes: How do we take into consideration the non-academic aspects? Yu: So exclude non-academic community? Lucero: Then rename. "The Ateneo community, with regard to its being an academic institution." Remo: Not our discharge. Lucero: But we do. Bolilia: "Academic community" because we're an academic institution. Andujare: So teaching staff, non-teaching staff, shared responsibility. Ruso: Why not say Ateneo community? Lucero: Name is associated with nature as academic institution. Remo: Different segments of the community, not the scope. Andujare: Wording? What was the proposed wording? Ruso: If that's the case, then emphasize the social justice part, make it a more encompassing national document. If the preference is to be expansive rather than inclusive. Yu: Yellow? Lucero: What is the interpretation that we have no contention with? Yu: Loyola Schools alone. "carry out our responsibilities towards social justice" Inside or outside the school? Clarify. 10
CENTRAL BOARD
Ruso: Include "inside and outside the Loyola Schools." "strengthen a culture of leadership" Don't know what it implies, can be taken as is. Reyes: "Culture" is problematic. Lucero: Split? Maintain ambiguity? Two levels. If you split, you clarify, but reduce the meaning. Ruso: I like "tradition." Strong tradition of leadership. Reyes: Balance "tradition" with a word that implies a future. Poe: "Perpetuate." Changed to "strengthen and perpetuate the tradition of leadership." Andujare: Foster? Yu: Makes sense for both words. Changed to "foster the tradition of leadership." "by embodying our libertarian ideals" Choice-based politics. We are a Jesuit university. Issues like RH are choice issues. Does the libertarian ideal correspond with that kind of religious paradigm? Reyes: Closes off to other ideologies. Poe: We're here to represent students and protect their choices because those are their ideals. Ruso: Best compromise is democratic ideals. No specific ideology. Lucero: Choosing a legitimate ideology for your student government affects everything. Elicao: If we go with democratic, what do we lose from "libertarian?" Ruso: Culture of choice. Andujare: Do we know enough of the history of this to change it? Lucero: That's the problem. We do not have access to the reasons. Remo: Protect students' right to choice. In this instance, admin is viewed as the government, imposing certain things. Student government is to limit the role of admin, free space for students. Lucero: Implications of the baggage. To limit the government as government. Priority is not your projects, priority is not what you want, but what the students want. Good thing sometimes, bad thing most of the time. Ruso: Push democratic idea. Neutral, unimposing, best compromise. Remo: Problem is not so much the wording but the perceived misinterpretation of the statement. We have run with the same preamble. Maybe what we need is to annotate for what we choose to believe it is. 11
CENTRAL BOARD
Reyes: Point of the constitution is not in the primacy of the text but in its interpretation. Text has no inherent meaning. We are trying to limit the number of misinterpretations possible. Ruso: Agree. Lucero: Fear is that there is baggage with the terms used. Strip the baggage, agreed interpretation, bring it up, make it primary text. If you can't break the baggage, make new words. Ruso: So like "every student's right to define themselves" and so on. "nationalist aspirations" Are we more within the university or not? Ruso: Similarly, "nationalist ideals" should be the reaching out, communitarian. Reword the ideologically loaded term. Possibly interchange. Elicao: Agree. "Christ-centered vision of a humane and sovereign society" It's confusing. Sovereignty usually refers to international affairs, Christ-centeredness is local. Need to change, I think. Ruso: Move rather than remove? Lucero: Christ-centered vision is Atenean. Ruso: I feel like this was written this way for literary balance. Elicao: What interpretation are we using for sovereign? Ruso: Free of external influence. Reyes: Humane? Elicao: Sovereignty is problematic. Implies protectionism. Lucero: So many words compounded in a single phrase. Reyes: No organic unity. Ruso: Sovereignty seems misplaced. Lucero: Have we tackled each part of it? Yu: Go back later. "where truth, justice, equality, and peace reign" Same as 1987 Constitution. Omissionslove and freedom. I don't know if you want to include love and freedom, but I think they should not be included, could be misinterpreted especially by students. No jurisprudence or information on how the 2005 group interpreted. Opinions? Yu: Go through one by one? 12
CENTRAL BOARD
Lucero: Do you completely agree? Yu: Is it important enough to be worth changing? I think we should go through it. Elicao: Is there a legal reason for "Undergraduate Students" to be capitalized? Ruso: No. Remo: When you address the student body, proper noun. Andujare: Contextualizeif this were a thesis, the preamble is the abstract. Thesis statement. We're doing a detailed outline of the Constitution. Gomez: Start with something more specific? Yu: So Declaration of Principles? Remo: Discussion will be more fruitful there. We have a basic understanding of what this is. Articulate in Article V. Yu: Proposing that we reevaluate the priority list. Given the flow and the speed. Motion to caucus by VP for ten minutes, seconded by 2 SOM CB. Motion approved. Motion to extend recess until 7:45pm by VP, seconded by Sec-Gen. Motion approved. Resumes at 7:47pm. Yu: The suggestion is that we proceed from now until the end of the session: go through priority list, run through, look through contentious parts but not deliberate, have a better view when we discuss structure. Lucero: Take note of organic unity of the whole document. If you see something not being implemented or nonfunctional, point it out. <Lucero goes through the new proposed Article V.> Section 1 Ruso: No mention of democracy? Lucero: Next section. Section 3 Lucero: I find "sustainable development" an oxymoron. Ruso: Development is by its nature not sustainable since it's based on increasing demand, growth, consumption. Politically worded statement, hot air. Gomez: Development that we can expect to be happening in the future? Lucero: Line of interpretation they used. Section 4 Gomez: Proactive response? We're more reactive. 13
CENTRAL BOARD
Section 5 Remo: Co-formators. Section 6b Gomez: Define student services. Section 6d Gomez: Relief ops. Most of the things we do are Sanggunian initiatives, not university initiatives. Us as bridge to students? Doesn't usually happen. Policies Section 7 Remo: Objection to explicitly including "marginalized sectors." Gomez: Not exclusive. Lucero: Make it sound more like preferential option for the marginalized. Section 8 Ruso: Inside and outside. Section 11 Elicao: Context of vision-based pluralism is that the 2012 constitution didn't want to selflimit to party-based pluralism. Section 12 Lucero: Qualify documents. Remo: Major conflict with preamble or objections? Ruso: With what we just edited or older? Remo: Older and also comments. Lucero: Both. Remo: Discuss proposed structure with the remaining time. Lucero: Top 5 > President, IVP, EVP, Sec-Gen, FO Central Board > Top 5, four SB Chairs, four standing committees EB > SBs, departments 14
CENTRAL BOARD
Legislative Board > old CB Remo: New CB sets direction, like ECA. Lucero: Revamp. ECA becomes central governing body. Elicao: Do the four standing committees become set in stone? Lucero: Can, but as of now, the roles can change. Consider this. Remo: Role of VPs? Lucero: IVP never leaves the President's side inside Ateneo, like balls. Like Bols. IVP is competent enough to fill in for the President whenever he is gone. We keep sending representatives with limited mandate to decide something beyond their constituency. IVP in charge of delegating. Remo: Previously, handled by president. Every administration handled it differently. Gomez: Buklod? Lucero: DEA. Yu: Right now, respecting autonomy of SBs in project-making. The power to determine when to override is with CB? Lucero: Yes. Yu: IVP is PMS? Lucero: Yes. Haven't laid out details yet. Remo: The Depts will be subsumed under the 2 VPs. Poe: Are you treating Chairs as you are treating them this year? Voting powers? Lucero: Yeah, theyre part of [the new] CB. Because they're in charge of the School Boards. Poe: Batch basis? Lucero: Still elected by batch. Aldea: List of roles? Yu: This is what we have. CB is Top 5 + chairs of the four standing committees, + SB Chairs. New CB is highest decision-making body. Exec is top 5 + four schools. Other half is legislative, four standing CB Committees + LB. Lucero: According to most constitutions, IVP succeeds if President steps down. Yu: Ends the argument where T4 has power in the CB. T5 is no longer in leg. Remo: Came up before. Compromise between autonomy of SBs and the need for a centralized government. 15
CENTRAL BOARD
Gomez: For example, Yolanda? Lucero: New CB. Gomez: If something happens, how do things operate? Yu: Address. Remo: Currently, President + special assistant and sectors respond, appoint DREAM Team head. Yu: Becomes President and IVP. Aldea: LIONS? Reyes: CEA. Gomez: Why not IVP? Yu: IVP is internal, but more executive. LIONS is legislative. Aldea: Organizations? Yu: IVP. Officially a student helping a group of students. Warren: Difference between CEA helping other orgs? Reyes: They have direct representation in CB. Yu: The idea of helping is executive, not legislative. Remo: You're hearing the side of the argument that stayed. What was the other side? Of why we stuck with it before? How do you distinguish between executive and legislative in student council? To lobby for beadles information sheets, it's a policy, but executive must implement. Like, I'm the one proposing it, "Hi guys, I'm Lars," when in theory, executive and legislative are the same. Lucero: Wrong notion of the division. Yu: Our congresspeople, they do projects because it's the most visible part of politics. Difficulty is framing ourselves to the idea that there will be top officers in Sanggu not doing projects, just writing. Poe: Shouldn't that be the current structure? Yu: The current consti is flippy. Lucero: It's a question of scope in the current. Schoolwide is CB, local is SB. Yu: Projects under CB now, start with LB, legislate, go to CB, then executive to execute. Ruso: Similar problemnow there are people double-bodying. Lucero: Four CB Reps with executive capacities. How you maintain the balance. But only at the top. Yu: Can give the four LB standing committees the same position as the chairs. No voting power. Remo: This first. Reyes: Committees more legislative in nature? How does this work with reps? Lucero: CIP changes. Gomez: Number of reps? Yu: Save for future discussion. 16
CENTRAL BOARD
Remo: Tomorrow, we resume bearing this new structure in mind as a proposal. And then we go through the comments. And then we begin formulating proposed structure. Tomorrow is the first ever Sanggu-wide Christmas party. Invite everyone, build a sense of community. Resume January 10. Reyes: To the sixteen officers who've signed up to panel orgs, get to know them. Motion to adjourn by 1 SOSS CB, seconded by 2 SOSE CB. Motion adjourned unanimously, meeting adjourned. Prepared By: Miguel Franco Ignacio M. Hamoy Secretariat Team Office of the Secretary-General Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral ng mga Paaralang Loyola ng Ateneo de Manila Antonio Rafael N. Elicao Secretary-General Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral ng mga Paaralang Loyola ng Ateneo de Manila Jan Nikko I. Dela Paz Secretariat Head Office of the Secretary-General Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral ng mga Paaralang Loyola ng Ateneo de Manila
17

Minutes 12-20-13 (CB)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Minutes 12-20-13 (CB)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CENTRAL BOARD

CENTRAL BOARD MEETING Date: December 20, 2013

Venue: MVP 200 Time: 4:45pm to 8:45pm

You might also like