Proposal considered despite objection
February 14, 1991
Students on the University Council tried and failed Wednesday to detour a proposal from being considered because they said it would be detrimental to students.
The proposal, made by English Professor James Giles, was to amend the University Constitution and allow the University Council “to approve and amend the Student Judicial Code.”
The proposal was put on the University Council’s consent agenda. But at the beginning of the meeting, five student members voted to take the proposal off the consent agenda.
However, University Council Secretary J. Carroll Moody said taking the proposal off the consent agenda could not stop it from coming up during the new business portion.
When the proposal came up again, the students tried to have the discussion postponed, but were outvoted by faculty and administrators.
Giles said his only concern is to clarify a relationship between the council and the codes. He said he proposed this as one of his two options. His other option is for the codes not to come up before the council at all.
Student Association President Robert McCormack said he wondered why the other option was not brought up.
Giles proposed that his amendment request be sent to Committee B (the rules and governance committee).
Council member Robert Tisch told other council members he wanted to wait until he could pass out historical documentation about the Code before they sent the proposal to a committee.
Another concern of the students was that one of the students n Committee B was sent to active duty and there wasn’t proper student representation on the committee.
However, Moody said he would appoint a student to that committee today.
NIU President John La Tourette agreed to have another student appointed before the committee met again. He said students should have the opportunity to present their point of view on the proposal.
McCormack said the council should not have power over the Code because 99 percent of the cases are not academically related.
After another vote, the proposal went to the Committee B anyway.