USG Executive Committee to further discuss referendum on U. administration

Editor's note appended

A lengthy debate erupted at yesterday’s USG meeting over a petition to put a referendum on the ballot for the upcoming election. The referendum would ask students to assess their views regarding the current University administration and the University’s future direction.

Kyle Smith ’09 proposed the petition but was not present at the meeting. Because Smith received more than 200 signatures in support of his petition, the USG is compelled by its constitution to put the referendum on the ballot unless it is deemed “frivolous” by a fraction of the Senate, according to an amendment on referenda procedures passed in October 2006.

During the discussion last night, USG members first debated over the exact definition of “frivolous” and whether the fraction was a three-fourths or a five-sixths majority.

The current version USG constitution, however, does not reflect the 2006 amendment, and thus would require the referendum to be automatically placed on the ballot because Smith had met the minimum signature threshold. After at least 45 minutes of discussion, Class of 2009 senator Bruce Halperin moved thatfurther examination of the referendum be taken to Executive Committee.

Many of those at the meeting voiced concern over the petition because of its message to the rest of the student body, its wording and its low expectation for signatures.

The referendum is a “bad example for students who think this is the only way they can do change,” USG social chair Christian Husby ’08 said. “[It] sets a really bad precedent.”

The “threshold is so low [in terms of signatures], … looking at this poorly constructed document,” said Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students Thomas Dunne, who described the wording of the petition as “sophomoric.” The petition “assumes this is the only way students can conduct concerns,” he added.

USG president Josh Weinstein ’09 said that putting the referendum on the ballot will not harm the USG’s relationship with the administration because the USG did not create the petition. He added, “it may be positive” because it is form of student input.

U-Councilor Liz Rosen ’10 next discussed a recent meeting that she, Weinstein and Undergraduate Life Committee member Kevin McGinnis ’11 had with a few campus administrators regarding the creation of satellite gyms to reduce overcrowding at Dillon Gym.

“Satellite gyms won’t happen anytime soon,” Rosen said. The administrators believed the University “should be funneling all of our funds to improving the main Dillon facility instead of diverting money … to less permanent facilities,” Rosen added.

Extended hours and the addition of cardio equipment at Stephens Fitness Center are two things that are being further looked into, Rosen said. A USG survey about the current and future use of Dillon will be going out to the student body within the next couple of days, she added.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Editor's note: The original version of this story failed to note that the amendment on referenda procedures that was passed in 2006 cannot be found in the current version of the USG constitution. The article has since been updated to reflect this change.