Student Senate 10/7

The Good 5 Cents Cigar Logo The Good 5 Cents Cigar Logo

The University of Rhode Island student senate passed several motions on Wednesday and continued to debate proposed constitutional changes involving the impeachment of the general assembly. 

Concerns were shared about recent behavior of student senators in the assembly such as not holding office hours or paying attention to discussion. 

“You have been elected to a position where it’s your responsibility to actively make changes that your constituents want to see,” Speaker of the General Assembly Ryan Niro said. “We’re in it to represent the people.” 

A new advisory committee is being formed to address ongoing issues about the use of student dining dollars. As part of the initiative, the committee will host a holiday food drive this December to support the community.  

The meeting began with committee and executive branch reports. Senators plan to promote safe driving laws throughout the month of October and are aiming to meet with the South Kingstown Police Department to address parking issues on campus. 

The Constitution Overview Committee aimed to finalize their constitution discussed over the past three weeks. Chair Dylan Waddell proposed five bills that aimed to clarify the impeachment process. 

Senate members proceeded to debate after a motion to enter a short five-to-ten minute recess and failed to secure any votes. 

Waddell’s first proposed amendment included casting one vote for a majority ticket as opposed to a ranked-choice voting system. 

Senators shared frustration over debating the constitution for several weeks. Niro mentioned that debate is a necessary part of senators’ responsibilities to represent their constituents. 

Recording Secretary and Sen. Max McConville suggested having a formal legal review before voting on the constitution, but allowed debate to continue. 

Niro believed any serious document that needs approval, such as a constitution, requires legal review. Chair Waddell argued against requiring separate referendums for every proposed amendment. A combined vote would better represent the students of the university, according to Waddell. A bill passed to postpone voting on the proposed constitution and allowed continued debate. 

The third proposed amendment aimed to remove members who consistently failed to attend meetings. Waddell believed this change was necessary because the existing bylaws did not have a mechanism to improve attendance. 

Senators disagreed with Waddell’s proposals, and wanted more clarification on the removal process of the senate president, vice president and senators. 

“This constitution is the outcome of a joke,” Signh said, chair of the Student Organizations Committee. “We tried doing it before, but we failed. I recommend we are all competent, rational human beings and have a brain for at least some parts of this constitution because it’s important.” 

A motion was passed to move on and hear Sen. Jack Curt’s amendment proposals instead of Waddell’s. Curt’s proposal was to oppose Waddell’s proposed amendment. 

Concerns were raised about how some areas of the impeachment process are beyond their control, such as legal consequences. 

Waddell addressed the current president of the senate. 

“You are not a voting member,” Waddell said. “I believe that more time should be given to the voting members of this table.” 

McConville proposed ending all debate on the amendments until legal counsel examines the proposals submitted by Waddell and Curt. The discussion has been tabled. 

Discussion on the constitution was tabled and legal counsel will review all proposed amendments by Waddell and Curt. 

Legal review has been conducted with the senate previously, but review will be conducted by the Levy & Blackman law firm. The firm was hired to review the student senate as a registered nonprofit organization because they are a separate group from the URI legal counsel, they have no ties to URI. 

The student senate will meet again next Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. in Room 300 of the Memorial Union for continued debate of proposed amendments to the constitution.