Parliamentary Inquiry

Every month our SGA gathers for general session meetings. Each branch or division usually updates the rest of the SGA… or maybe the SGA President updates us on the future of the university. We had our last general session on February 16th and this time was different. It was my turn to take the stage.

The Constitution Committee has been working on making changes to the SGA Constitution — changes that require a vote usually conducted at this meeting. As the committee chair, I get to propose the changes and facilitate the discussion and voting.

Overall, I proposed four major changes. One of which was controversial enough to provoke discussion that lasted over 30 minutes and included a written statement.

This was my first-ever experience conducting a large meeting; furthermore, there were more than 35 people in the audience and many of them had something to say. Before the meeting, I had convinced myself of no outcome. I knew that things would either go slow or fast, be debated on or ignored, approved or not. However, nothing could have prepared me for this kind of public speaking occasion. I had to be very focused and respectful. I had to use parliamentary procedure like nobody’s business. I had to count votes and declare the outcome.

It took me nearly a day to recover. I was drained from the entire ordeal, but I enjoyed every minute of it. Some lessons learned are: to prepare well, then prepare some more, and plan for the unexpected. Prepare.

In the end, the most controversial change did not pass. I’m not upset with with the outcome. Nor am I upset with myself and how I guided the meeting. It’s quite possible that we’ll reintroduce it next month. Or maybe the month after. Either way, I’ll be better prepared.

Advertisement