The University Council debated suggestions to replace a motion that would enable amendments to the University Constitution and Bylaws be approved by a two-thirds vote of present representatives.

The move would have enabled faculty to expand their influence on the council since a bloc vote of faculty representatives could be sufficient to amend the constitution.

The motion had been under consideration in committee B of the UC, and had been rejected. Committee B Chair Judith Bischoff, associate professor of physical education, explained the committee’s decision.

“Committee B has decided not to support (the motion) because of the low number of members in attendance at council meetings,” Bischoff said. “The 30 faculty members in the University Council could bloc vote to amend the bylaws. No one group should be able to bloc vote.”

The committee was almost unanimous in opposition to the proposal, with only one vote in favor.

Bischoff made three alternative recommendations to solve the problem of not enough members to vote.

“We could move the changes to the top of the agenda, so people who have to leave early can. Or we could limit debate that bogs the University Council down or we could put a time limit on the debate,” Bischoff said.

However, many faculty representatives pushed for a greater faculty voice on the committee.

“We shall be the dominate voice over the other voices,” said James Giles, a professor in the English department. “The faculty haven’t predominated enough to suit me.”

Student representative Harry Kontos disagreed with the suggestion to move bylaw changes to the top of the agenda.

“Why would someone take this position (UC representative) if they don’t have the time for this?” Kontos asked. “Representatives have to be willing to attend the meetings.”

Lorys Oddi, associate professor in the school of nursing, said, “We have discussed the difficulties of getting alternatives. We can’t always control absences.”

Charles Larson, professor of communication studies, suggested an alternative to the suggestions. He said at late meetings when UC members leave, Roberts Rule of Order allows a vote by mail on important issues.

“We could move the changes to the top of the agenda, so people who have to leave early can. Or we could limit debate that bogs the University Council down or we could put a time limit on the debate.”