Student Senate Minutes
October 28, 2007

I. General meeting of the Student Senate was called to order by Speaker Poindexter at 6:00 PM.
	A. Absent from the meeting were members: 
	B. Also attending the meeting was: Blake Peterson,  Hamilton, Douglas U. Shelby 		Higganbotham.
II. Preliminary Items
	A. Roll Call
	B. Corrections/Approval of the minutes
	C. Gallery introductions/business
		A. Douglas U – Promoting undergraduate research by recognizing faculty 			that are involved in research during the symposium. Any suggestions.
			Hayes – Likes the proposal. Strong emphasis on undergrad 					research makes Truman unique. 
			Mozaffar – Were you looking from involvement from Senate?
			Douglas U. – We don’t want any financial involvement but we 				want students involved in the decision making process. Whether or 			not Senate would be the decision or suggesting students that 				would.
			Esfeld – We have experience doing EOY and we would be 					qualified to at least start the process. It would come down to a 				question of man power.
			Hayes – Do you have people within your organization that are 				directly involved?
			Douglas U. – Will be graduating and is currently the only student 				representative. Part of is proposal is to find students.
			Hayes – Would be appropriate to refer this to the Academic Affairs 			committee.
			Wisa – Moves that the Academic Affairs committee should take 				this up as a project.
			Approved.
	D. Guests of Honor
	E. Membership Issues
	F. Appointments/Administration of the Oath
	G. Changes/Approval of the agenda
III. Executive Reports
	A. Secretary
	B. Treasurer
	C. President
IV. Auxiliary Reports
	A. Faculty Advisor
	B. Staff Advisor
	C. BOG
	D. Speaker
V. Committee Reports
	A. Academic Affairs
	B. External Affairs Chairwoman
	C. Student Affairs
		i. Campus Diversity
		ii. Campus Environment
	D. Technology
	E. Other Reports
		i. Historian
		ii. Communications Director
		iii. Webmaster
		iv. Ethics Justice
		v. Recruitment
		vi. Legislative Director
		vii. Constitutional Review
VI. Old Business
	A. Esfeld – Moves resolution on Early Registration
		Esfeld – Believes all amendments are included. Please read it over. Would 		like to pass it tonight.
		Szewczyk – Exchanged emails with VP Gordon and Dr. Gall (chair of 			athletics committee) both show concern with resolution. Since there had 			been no official proposal, they wonder why Senate chose to take action 			with a resolution. They are worried that it will just spread animosity. 
		Esfeld – Understands concerns but feels that Senate has gotten one of the 			strongest responses to an issue in one direction. Not taking action would 			be a disservice to the student body. Action should be taken.
		Peterson – Wondering where the whole proposal came from.
		Esfeld – We have had no success tracking someone down.
		Szewczyk – There has been no official memo, documentation, or meeting. 			This was an idea that had been verbally communicated. We brought it up 			as a discussion item so Senators could go get student reactions. A lot of 			students came to the gallery after the Index article.
		Kirtland – Every year there has been a rumor regarding this.
		Peterson – It would be irresponsible of Senate to pass a resolution 				shooting this down without doing research first. Every other school in our 			division has an early registration system for athletes. Most athletics have 			academic and athletic scholarships. Athletes must then choose between 			missing class and missing practice to register. Does not mean that early 			registration should be started in Truman. Proper research needs to be 			conducted.
		Alberts – Did research and found out that the person who brought up the 			idea was someone named Peterson who attended an Athletic Conference. 			So it seems that you brought up the proposal.
		Peterson – Went to the conference and emailed Jerry Wolmering.
		Wisa – Peterson is the first person he has spoken to that actually supports 			the idea of early registration for athletes. Cannot ignore constituency. 
		Peterson – Not 100% in support of early registration. Does not want the 			Senate to shoot down the idea without research.
		Wisa – We have done research. One senator did a written survey. We have 		explored what other schools do.
		Peterson – How many athletes did you talk to?
		Esfeld – Spoke with head of SAC. She directed Senate to Mr. Peterson. 			Senate has talked to athletes and this was the general opinion.
		Peterson – If this were to pass, would this prevent future Senate’s from 			looking into this idea? (No.) Is this just to appease the Index? (No, this 			was brought to Senate’s attention before the article).
		Esfeld – The purpose of this resolution is to give voice to the strong 			student opinion that has been heard over the past few weeks.
		Hemmelgarn – Could we add an amendment that we support professors 			being more accepting of giving yellow cards to athletes?
		Esfeld – Combining those in one resolution might not be a good idea. 			Academic Affairs is looking into the Registration process currently.
		Kirtland – This is the best possible thing we can get out of this discussion. 			If this resolution is not passed, a vote will go to the student body and then 			early registration for athletes would likely never happen. We need to 			further explore the problems with registration. 
		Givogue – Surprised that athletes were half and half with the early 				registration. Also talked to a faculty member about the issue. Apparently a 		few years ago, something went through the administration wanting to 			prevent athletes from missing class for any reason. Activities banded 			together against it. What came of it was professors getting the discretion 			of giving excused absences to athletes.
		Peterson – The best thing that could be done is having professors be 			obligated to allow athletes to make up missed classes due to University 			sponsored events.
		Alberts – An Absence Appeals Committee was formed for students. In all 			the years of its existence, it has not been used once. Most faculty are 			willing to work out issues as long as it is approached reasonably.
		
VII. Money Motions
	A. Meyer – Moves $100 from the SOC budget to be spent on APO’s Ugly Man 			on Campus, no later than December 10, 2007. Yields time to Amanda 			Hamilton.
		Wisa – What is the $100 for?
		Hamilton – Posters $35 (UMOC is coming). Poster and manila envelopes. 			$25 worth of copies. $15 for pageant gifts. 
		Kirtland – All of the money is going to the Newman Center?
		Hamilton – Half goes to Newman Center and the other half the winner 			will decide what charity to give the money to.
		Kiddoo – There was opposition to this in the Index editorials. Have you 			heard any opposition?
		Hamilton – No opposition thus far. Students have the option not to 				participate.
		Hayes – How does this stand within the SOC’s mission.
		Meyer – The mission states that the SOC can fund things that outreach the 			community and the university as a whole. TSODA uses it and other 			organizations do. It is not just a church.
		Alberts – Newman Center is a student organization. It is not a church. We 			can’t give money directly to a charity but we can support the fundraising 			for one.
		Givogue – The only money going to the Newman Center would be raised 			by participants? (Yes.)
		Mozaffar – This is money given to APO not a religious group.
		Approved. 
VIII. First Readings
IX. Discussion Items
	A. Miller – Amendment to standing rules regarding proper expenditure. No 		second. Motion fails.
	B. Poindexter – Amendment to section 6 (Duties of Associates).
		Poindexter – Changing the standing rules will allow our actions to come 			into compliance with our standing rules.
		Kirtland – The committee as a whole should count as committee. 				Accepted as friendly.	
		Esfeld – Only concern is that if there is an associate strictly serving on a 			University Committee we would never hear from them. Strike university 			committee from requirements.
			Esfeld – Afraid that an associate may not keep Senate informed if 				they are not reporting to a specific committee.
			Kirtland – In order to fulfill obligations as an associate, you must 				report back to someone. If we don’t include this, the President 				could send someone who is not a member of Senate to these 				committees.
			Albert – Used to have in the standing rules that if you were 					appointed to a University Committee you were automatically made 			an associate senator. Possibly put this back in.
			Esfeld – Withdraws amendment.
		Esfeld – Proposes to add “deemed necessary by chair or speaker” at the 			end.
			Accepted.
		Alberts – Cross out the word committee before obligations. Accepted as 			friendly.
		Amendment passes 14-1-0.
X. Other New Business
XI. Announcements

Respectfully submitted by Secretary Piel on