Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Call to Order
Raquel calls the meeting to order at 6:02 PM
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
Old Business
VII.
New Business
REPA 20150128 Approving Funds (Finance Committee)
Matthew: Budget presentation attached.
Jordan: Would it be appropriate for UFC to be here?
Eric: If the club cant present to the finance committee, then the present to Rep. Assembly.
Matthew: This is our presentation of our recommendation. I seek a motion to approve these funds.
Monica: So moved.
Myra: Seconded.
Raquel: The motion passes unanimously, with abstention from Braden who is absent.
Raquel: This is a list of things well be doing. Steering decided, with Myra, to find new or stronger ways
to connect with our constituents. Some of those things include public comment and First Friday
Doughnuts and improving our office space, etc. This is what weve come up with so far.
Myra: Its important that were productive in the office and cultivating a space in which our constituents
feel comfortable coming to talk to us.
Luke: Not only is our job to reach out to people, but we need to be proactive as well. If you overhear
something, then you have a responsibility, as a representative, to bring that to the group. Be conscious of
the opportunities to better Seattle U that are constantly around you.
Raquel: Myra sent out an email about email processes. There are other instructions as well. We talked
about posting the agenda outside the office by the door.
Meg: In our UA meeting last week, we discussed raising awareness for public comment.
Owen: I like the idea of using the facebook page more generally, especially for raising awareness for
public comment.
Eric: Izzy and I are going to start a strategic communication plan to get people interested in the We the
Redhawks petition program.
Raquel: We just wanted to bring this to the group, so that everyones on the same page.
REPA 20150128 Merit Based Scholarships (Eric Sype)
Eric: Last Friday I was in a Board of Regents meeting. They meet four times a year. Connie Kanter
spoke about finances of the university. Marilyn Crone spoke about enrollment. Josh Krawczyk came and
spoke regarding retention. Hes going to come speak to this group later this quarter. One thing that I
noticed from his presentation was that he had a graph that showed two bodies of students: non-transfer
students and then transfer students. For each of those groups there was an EFC, which is Estimated
Family Contribution, which is how financial aid estimates how much money you get. If your EFC was
greater than 50% then there was a number for the percentage of those students what were retained and
thats at a very high level. Our retention has improved since the beginning of the year. And then there
was the opposite of that, which was if your EFC is lower than 50% of tuition. Basically, students of
lower and higher socioeconomic levels. On both groups of students, transfers and non-transfers, students
who were in lower socioeconomic group (families with a less than 50% EFC), there was a 6-8% drop in
retention. Which doesnt sound like a huge number, but actually is. Its one of the main reasons were in
the financial situation we are now. At the end of the presentation, I brought up looking at how we do
merit based scholarships at this university. Currently, everyone gets a merit based scholarship and its
tied to GPA and SAT/ACT scores. With those two factors playing into how merit based aid is
distributed, Im wondering if theres a way to change the way these scholarships are distributed because,
as they stand, I believe they play into complex systems of privilege. Im wondering if were giving a lot
of aid to students who dont necessarily need it. Originally that was kind of shot down, but Ive briefly
connected with some people and were talking about it some more. Possibly introduce a way for
students to return their scholarships to the university if they dont necessarily need them. As I was
walking out with Connie Kanter, she mentioned that shes interested in looking into seeing if the
numbers match up with what were talking about. I described my interaction with the Naeff Scholarship
program. What are your thoughts?
Monica: The 6-8% of student you talked about, are they middle class or upper-middle class?
Eric: The 6-8% are students whose EFC is less than 50%.
Meg: Clarify?
Eric: If your EFC is lower, then youre going to get more financial aid.
Meg: People with a lower EFC are retained at a lower rate.
Luke: It takes into account your familys income with regard to paying for school.
Myra: Students who can pay for school should donate their scholarship back?
Eric: That was a suggested idea.
Monica: Did you say theres a correlation between higher socioeconomic status, higher merit based
scholarships, and higher SAT/ACT scores and GPAs?
Eric: Sort of. We need to look into that correlation.
B)
C)
D)
E)
X.
XI.
Committee Reports
A. PAB:
a. Tabling for new question of This is Seattle U, the week after next. (10th and 12th)
b. Fr. Ely Forum, last week of February.
B. Steering:
a. Retreat: difficult to schedule.
b. Idea: last part of retreat would be going to the Drag Show (March 14th)
C. Finance:
a. 28 appropriations requests
b. April 11th Appropriations meeting is being rescheduled because it conflicts with iLead.
D. University Affairs:
a. Discussed budget ideas.
Announcements
Eric: Next Tuesday, theres a table at the Clubs and Involvement Fair for SGSU
Raquel: Drag Show is April 10th
Matthew: If youre planning to attend the International Dinner, come get your tickets after the meeting.
Izzy: Shout out to Myra who is on the Homecoming court!
Adjournment at 7:20 PM