Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

SGA President Matthew McCann issues executive order

Judicial Council finds issuance of order to be constitutional

Online Editor

Published: Sunday, January 22, 2012

Updated: Friday, May 25, 2012 12:05

Judicial Council

Adrienne Cutway/Central Florida Future

From left to right: Assistant Chief Justice Janelly Crespo, Justice Seat 12 Priscilla Perez, Justice Seat 6 AJ Lakraj and Assistant Chief Justice Dalya Bordman prepare to issue a ruling during the Judicial Council meeting on Jan. 13.

Download PDF

A PDF of the SGA executive order, the memorandum and the Attorney General's official opinion.

The vote was unanimous on Friday when the Student Government Association’s Judicial Council met to decide whether or not an executive order issued by SGA President Matthew McCann was constitutional.

The executive order, which was issued on Dec. 14, 2011, called for the Activity and Service Fee Business Office to cease processing FAO Allocation 44-23.

According to Financial Allocations for Organizations Chair Kevin Gay, it’s extremely rare for an executive order to be issued.

“As far as I know there’s not a single Student Government agent that can recall an executive order being passed in recent memory,” Gay said.

The allocation was for the Mobile Innovation Club in the amount of $1,000 to help them attain a club banner, a banner design, cloud servers and storage, an 8GB iPod Touch, a .org domain name, a Kindle Fire and an Apple iOS developer program.

According to Gay, the allocation was approved in the FAO committee on Nov. 16, 2011 and passed favorably when it was read into the minutes during the Senate meeting on Nov. 17, 2011.

When asked, McCann cited several reasons as to why he believes the allocation passed favorably in both instances.

“I think it’s a variety of reasons, not necessarily an error that was part of it, but also there was a lack of knowledge on spending and specifically senators in the FAO committee were looking on things on the micro [level] when they have to look at the macro [level],” he said Saturday.

In his executive order, McCann cited two main reasons for ceasing the allocation.

His first concern was that the items mentioned in the allocation would not benefit the student body as a whole.

“The fact that these items will not be accessible to all students is in clear violation of Florida State Statute as well as our own Student Body Statutes,” McCann wrote in the executive order.

McCann also thought that the money would be used to “ ... essentially fund an educational program ... ”

“There are other fees such as the Technology Fee or E&G [departmental] funds that go to programs like this, where they are appropriate methods of funding,” McCann wrote. “If we continue to go down this road we would put ourselves open and liable to start funding the front desk staff of the Library or equipment for the Film Department, etc.”

McCann elaborated during a phone interview on Saturday saying that it’s not feasible for SGA to fund start-up organizations or to pay for walk-away items, especially ones that are only available to a limited number of students.

“ ... for them [students] to have to pay for the same items twice isn’t fair,” McCann said referring to the possibility of one of the items being lost, stolen or broken.

According to both McCann and Gay, two iPads were stolen from the Office of Student Involvement. McCann said that did not factor into his decision, but he said it does show how desirable electronics are.

SGA Sen. Joshua Scriven thought that McCann overstepped his powers and violated the Student Government Constitution by issuing the order, so he wrote a memorandum to request an official opinion from the Judicial Council.

“It is therefore, also clear that, within the [sic] Study Government, it is Senate, and not the Executive that has the final review over funding processes,” Scriven wrote in the memorandum, which was issued Jan. 15.

After McCann issued his executive order, an official opinion was obtained from Attorney General Cortez Whatley, who acts as a legal adviser to the SGA president. That opinion was obtained on Dec. 23, 2011.

The inquiry given to Whatley was: “Does the Student Body President have the authority to issue Executive Orders?”

Whatley answered yes, citing Article III, Section I of UCF’s Constitution. The clause states that, “All executive powers and those powers not specifically granted herein to other branches of Student Government shall be vested in the Student Body President ... ”

Although Whatley supported McCann’s decision, he added that executive orders should be used sparingly so that the Executive Branch doesn’t overextend its power.

“The Constitution of the University of Central Florida as well as its Student Body Statutes were written in accordance with democratic principles, and an abuse of this unique power will result in more of a dictatorial type of governance,” Whatley wrote in his official opinion.

All 13 of the Justices agreed with Whatley’s opinion when they met in the Black and Gold Ballroom, a small room inside the SGA Office on the second floor of the Student Union, Friday at 2:30 p.m.

“As the Judicial Council, we are looking at the physical acts of both the legislative branch and the executive branch,” Chief Justice Jordan Shapiro said at the beginning of the meeting.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

11 comments

Kevin Gay
Mon Jan 23 2012 12:58
The link below has the minutes for the FAO meeting at which the allocation was approved for anyone who is interested. You'll need to download it to view the entire document. The tables get messed up in Google Doc's view.

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B5s7qr8lUm5NNjM4N2Q3NmUtMzcyOS00NDYxLTkyZDgtOWZiMjgzZDUwN2U4

Paul Szerlip
Mon Jan 23 2012 10:53
"If senate can fund an iPod for someone than I want a LCD tv for my tv club." ... " the things that Senate funded are ridiculous. Funding electronics that have no ability to be accounted for whatsoever?" ... "just because your club needs iPods doesn't mean our fees should pay for them. There is something called dues you could charge your members, the government doesn't need to pay for everything."

I can honestly understand the points these statements are trying to make, but unfortunately they're either not factually correct or suffer from the either-or fallacy. Asking for an iPod was not a nefarious plot by the mobile club to squander all 1 iPod for ourselves and to whisk away into the sunset playing with apps. You cannot test location based apps without a device. You cannot test apps using accelerometers or gyroscopes without a device. You cannot easily test multitouch features without a device. I have built apps before. I have helped other build apps before. I know how long it takes when you don't have the hardware, and when you do have the hardware.

It should not be the direct burden of our members to pay for this equipment (despite having plans to charge some dues). Some people, such as myself, cannot afford to pay for an iPod for testing purposes, am I excluded from the group? I have put in my tuition, our members have put in their tuition. We feel that it is completely reasonable to request from senate something that will enhance our ability to create something for the UCF community. And by God, senate agreed! We're not the TV club because the TV club doesn't directly make anything. We're not the dance club asking for an iPod to play music. We build things. The group is dedicated to building things. We don't consume them. Surely the difference is evident?

It is unfortunate that you are misinformed about what we need the devices for, as well as where they will be stored. If only the article said something about that: "It would be stored in Partnership II, which is a UCF-owned building in Research Park, the security's actually managed by the NSA [National Security Agency] because the building has clearance for research." Hmm, that sounds a bit like being accounted for...

Anonymous
Mon Jan 23 2012 01:07
Florida State Statute 1009.24 State university student fees specifically, BY LAW, assigns the "student government association legislative body" AND NOT THE SGA PRESIDENT the power to decide how the money gets spent. In fact, based on this, even if the University President (Hitt) vetoes the SGA Senate's allocations twice, Hitt can't spend the money himself. It has to sit in and account so they can try again in the future.

BOTTOM LINE: State statutes trump any SGA statute or any kangaroo court ruling by the judicial council or AG. If Senate isn't clear on it, write a resolution and have AG Pam Bondi let you know her opinion.

On a side note, this shows how the A&SF Committee is powerless. It's totally up to the Senate how the budget gets spent. The A&SF Committee recommendation can be ignored by Senate completely, and Senate can do its own budget.

Here's Florida State Statute 1009.24 State university student fees portions. A link to the full law is below.

(b) The student activity and service fees shall be expended for lawful purposes to benefit the student body in general. This shall include, but shall not be limited to, student publications and grants to duly recognized student organizations, the membership of which is open to all students at the university without regard to race, sex, or religion.

...

The allocation and expenditure of the fund shall be determined by the student government association of the university, except that the president of the university may veto any line item or portion thereof within the budget when submitted by the student government association legislative body. The university president shall have 15 school days from the date of presentation of the budget to act on the allocation and expenditure recommendations, which shall be deemed approved if no action is taken within the 15 school days. If any line item or portion thereof within the budget is vetoed, the student government association legislative body shall within 15 school days make new budget recommendations for expenditure of the vetoed portion of the fund...
If the university president vetoes any line item or portion thereof within the new budget revisions, the university president may reallocate by line item that vetoed portion to bond obligations guaranteed by activity and service fees. Unexpended funds and undisbursed funds remaining at the end of a fiscal year shall be carried over and remain in the student activity and service fund and be available for allocation and expenditure during the next fiscal year.

Full Statute here: leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=1000-1099/1009/Sections/1009.24.html

Colin Forward
Sun Jan 22 2012 20:22
Walter,

I appreciate that you have an opinion but why the accusations?

1. If they were unbiased they would have addressed the fact that the argument in the executive order was unconstitutional, even if the orders themselves aren't inherently unconstitutional. The order even says that it was issued because Matt doesn't think its in the best interest of the student body, but he doesn't get a say in that. It is explicitly senate's job to determine that. At one point during the hearing, the Chief Justice was asked if the President then had essentially unlimited power and he said "yes." Also....Communism?

2. We will be charging dues. Senate's job is to determine what is worth funding. Personally I would rather keep my tuition money to myself but as long as they are taxing my education I'd rather see it used to provide opportunities to other students rather than anything else.

3. Who said anything about profits? This group will have no stake in any apps that get built by it's members. The other student group I started was Habitat for Humanity and I spent a lot of my own money making it successful. I assure you, there is no profit to gain and If I were looking to embezzle student funds I would run for office.

4. The devices will be in the faculty advisors lab which is a shuttle stop in research park. Anyone can come use them.

5. Yes, Kevin spoke in favor of it. He's also working to set up an inventory management office for stuff like this. He's run an RSO and knows how important tangible assets are to the mission of certain groups. Its not a favoritism thing. It fits in his agenda.

Walter Padick
Sun Jan 22 2012 19:46
@Colin Forward to address your comments below:

1-the AG and justices are also confirmed by senate and it is their job to be unbiased. some senators are appointed by the president too but that doesn't mean they do everything the president wants. your logic is flawed and basically undermines a democratic system. I'm sure you'd be much happy with communism.

2-just because your club needs iPods doesn't mean our fees should pay for them. There is something called dues you could charge your members, the government doesn't need to pay for everything.

3- whatever engineers club you are talking about probably wins championships and gets national recognition. you want these iPods so YOU can advance yourself and turn a profit off whatever your making. these other clubs don't make a profit they do it because its a social activity. The keychains and koosizes you speak of go to every student. Do you plan out sharing your iPods and kindle fire with every student? will you be letting the entire student body use your server space?

4- I am lolling that you are putting a banner and an iPod and kindle fire and sever space on the same level. Thats like saying every time sga funds a binder for a club they need to keep track of it. if you read the article its pretty clear they don't want funds going to electronics that people would steal and use for personal use. trust me, if you got your banner for your club no one would want to steal it. sga shouldn't have to keep track of anything because they should give money for that stuff to begin with.

5- kevin gay didn't vote on the allocation because according to roberts rules you can't vote if you are running the meeting. I wonder if he spoke out in favor of the money for it or pushed people into funding it. I wonder?

Colin Forward
Sun Jan 22 2012 19:24
To address the comments below:

- The Attorney General and all of the justices are APPOINTED by the PRESIDENT. Now, talk to me about checks and balances. That's a pretty clear conflict of interest.

- It's a mobile design group group. We need the devices so that students can test their projects. There is no mobile curriculum at UCF and we're helping students learn practical skills that can mean good jobs in the future. I myself work in mobile software.

- The devices cost a total of $430 (once) which is a lot less than the $13k given to the auto engineers (every year) for their race cars, which are kept off campus in someone's trailer. It's also a lot less than is spent on keychains and cozies that are just given away for promotions. We picked the cheapest devices possible.

- These devices are much easier to account for than the promotional banners SGA funds every week and cost about the same. The devices have GPS built in. SGA lost theirs because they didn't track them appropriately.

- Kevin did not vote on the allocation, and either way, it passed on the senate floor.

Brandon
Sun Jan 22 2012 17:57
Anonymous and Anonymous, there is something called checks and balances for a reason. Senate cannot just do something without some sort of oversight. the Judicial Branch, Attorney General and President all ruled that the iPods shouldn't be funded, senate can't just do something without some sort of check. and i don't really want my fees going to buy iPods and kindle fires for some students that is just stupid. good job President McCann!
Russell Faraday
Sun Jan 22 2012 17:44
Finally somebody is willing to not let the legislative branch continue funding the stupid things they fund. Time after time senate screws over the rsos by not funding their conferences and events but funds iPods for a club. which btw the president of the club is best friends with kevin Gay the FAO chair. If senate can fund an iPod for someone than I want a LCD tv for my tv club.
Anonymous
Sun Jan 22 2012 17:33
While I think that the SBP doesn't have the authority to do this, Anonymous 17:09's argument is totally invalid for a number of reasons. Dictating what can be funded and restricting access to an accounting program are totally different things.

As for the SBP having the authority to do this, the article cited in the AG opinion is baseless. The key to the argument here is "and those powers [***]not specifically granted herein[***]." The power over allocation of funding from the Senate FAO accounts is clearly and explicitly defined in Title 9, Chapter 901, Section G3. By telling the Senate what they can and cannot fund, the Executive branch has breached the separation of powers.

Now, even that being so, the things that Senate funded are ridiculous. Funding electronics that have no ability to be accounted for whatsoever? The members of the FAO committee should be embarrassed and ashamed. Never before have I seen such a blatantly incompetent misallocation of funds (and that's saying something).

Anonymous
Sun Jan 22 2012 17:09
They could also reference Florida statutes (the ones governing student fees) showing the legislative body has the power over allocating funds... not the president. It was the same principle used when Kilbride's Knightmare fight was going on. When challenged, UCF's lawyer backed down and opened up the money to senate to see.
Anonymous
Sun Jan 22 2012 17:05
Why doesn't the senate just write a special act ordering the A&SF office to process the funding as required? A vote from the senate (especially 2/3rds) always overrides the president.

And I don't think it's legal for McCann to do what he did through an executive order. He could have frozen the funds, but there is a process for that that's spelled out -- and a way for the senate to overturn it.





log out