The Stony Brook University Undergraduate Student Government (USG) gathered on Thursday, April 17 to debate adding numerous amendments to the USG Procedural Manual.
The amendments were proposed by at-large Senator and incoming Vice President of University Affairs Ece Naz Durali, who aimed to add two new organization policies, specifically under the Code of Conduct section.
The first amendment she proposed seeks to ensure that voting members of the committee, including the Senate, Judicial Board and Executive Council, cannot vote on matters that concern a registered student organization, club, agency or campus entity they are part of.
She asserted that although the Senate already maintains this standard by abstaining from voting, there is currently no formal legislation in place to enforce it.
The second amendment would follow the first one and assert that if any voting members fail to abstain from matters involving organizations they are affiliated with, the first instance will serve as a warning. However, if it occurs a second time, then the voting member could be impeached by the Senate in accordance with the USG Constitution.
At-large Senator Lauren Fanter agreed with Durali and further explained that these amendments would help clarify conflict of interests within USG. She also noted that it could help establish the requirements to consider someone an active member of an organization.
President Nistha Boghra responded to Mahmud, acknowledging that there may be situations in which USG will not know if someone is an active member. However, she explained this serves as an outline as to what will occur if a voting member is found in violation.
“We’re really diligent about making sure that the Senate is being as fair and objective as possible,” Boghra explained. “In the event that it comes to light that someone does have a conflict and [it has occurred] multiple times, it obviously wouldn’t go well for a senator to hide that.”
Fanter highlighted that this legislation won’t necessarily change anything about the way the Senate conducts itself.
“This isn’t something that is new, the fact that doing something like this is punishable also isn’t new,” Fanter added.
Fanter referenced the USG Code of Conduct policies, specifically amendment 3.d, which explicitly states, “violations of the above policies may be subject to impeachment of elected officials or firing at the discretion of an employee’s supervisor.” However, the stark difference is that the legislation proposed by Durali would solidify a procedure to address this specific violation.
“This clarifies what an instance of being caught doing this could look like,” Fanter continued. “This sets up the warning process, because the way it’s written in the [USG Procedural Manual] makes it seem that you could get immediately impeached.”
At-large Senator Taher Motiwala then asked if voting members affiliated with organizations would be required to step out of the room.
Durali responded that it would enforce voting members to abstain.
At-large Senator Russell Erfan then questioned, “[When it comes to] matters that directly regard our organization, is this mostly in the realm of grants or if there’s a sweeping piece of legislation that might affect all different kinds of clubs, and mine in particular? Would I not be able to vote?”
Executive Vice President Ray Chen stated that in future cases, it would be at the discretion of the respective committee to determine whether or not voting members must abstain.
At-large Senator Rayan Iqbal suggested that to verify a conflict of interest, clubs could include a roster of their active members when submitting any necessary applications.
At-large Senator Sophia Dimont replied to Iqbal with an alternative solution as to how members can be identified.
“I think an alternative to that could be Senators could be required to disclose what organizations they are part of — that way it’s less pressure on the clubs themselves [to submit something extra],” she said.
Dimont expanded on her point, emphasizing that this policy establishes clear guidelines. She noted that if such a violation were to occur, it must be documented, and that a warning system would be helpful in ensuring that the voting member is aware of their error.
The Senate voted to approve both legislations.
