Senate Considers Coalition

Senate Seeking More Student Participation

Senate met both Sunday and Monday this week to discuss, among other things, the recently proposed judicial policy and a means of introducing increased student participation with Senate. Senior senator Sam Taylor proposed the possibility of a new means of electing senators -voting blocs of student organizations. These voting coalitions would be organized together based on their functions and goals on campus. For instance, two organizations representing sexual awareness, such as the Sexual Information Center (SIC) and the Sexual Assault Support Team (SAST) would potentially be grouped together as a voting bloc.

Junior senators Erika Hansen and Aaron Leavy identified increased decision making by more active students as a potential benefit of Taylor's proposal. However, Leavy called the task of coaxing student organizations to accept designated classifications "a logistical nightmare." Still, both Leavy and Hansen mentioned the strong base of student leadership that could emerge out of an alliance between student organizations and Senate. "Student organizations have an active membership base and Senate has power with the administration, so combined, we'd be a force to be reckoned with," Hansen said. Although Taylor's proposal has been scrapped for the moment, Hansen said he plans to revise it and invite the liaison of every student organization to Sunday's Senate meeting to ask for their opinion on how senators can go about forming stronger relations with the student body.

Regarding judicial matters, senators had time to review Dean of Students Peter Goldsmith and Associate Dean of Students Bill Stackman's proposal for a new judicial policy, and have reacted overwhelmingly positively. Although Senate will not formally ratify, amend or reject the document, Goldsmith said he hoped Senate would take a strong stance as to whether or not they support it. "My hope is to have them take an official position on the draft and I think they've done that."

"It's a well-written document," Leavy said. Leavy confirmed that senators support Goldsmith and Stackman's judicial proposal, but with some minor changes. One Senate recommendation is to eliminate the language stipulating that fledgling groups who have not gained full organizational status must sign their names to their posters and flyers. Also, while the document currently states that no student should be discriminated against for race, gender, religion or physical disability, among other things, Leavy asserted Senate's desire to include mental disability as another protected category.

Goldsmith expressed hope that the proposed judicial policy will be in place as an official document next fall. "When its in a position that both Senate and Student Life can live with it, it will go to the General Faculty, hopefully in the May meeting," he said. General Faculty meets May 16th.

Finally, Sunday's Senate meeting included discussion on their bi-annual referendum, which will soon appear in student mailboxes. The referendum aims to tabulate student opinion as to whether senators deserve to be paid. Currently, senators are paid, and students have voted in favor of their receiving payment for the past three years. Furthermore, the referendum will attempt to form a sense of student opinion on more general Oberlin-related matters. In conjunction with the referendum, Hansen said she hopes to post an on-line survey that would allow students to provide feedback on administrative offices, administrators, and professors, an especially useful tool as students register for fall courses.

Nominations for next year's Senate positions began Monday and end April 28 at midnight. Students can nominate themselves or others by e-mailing osenate@oberlin.edu.