During their last meeting of the 2016 fall semester on Wednesday, the NC State Student Senate heard Resolution 60, a bill aimed at protecting undocumented students, and Finance Bill 41, a bill to redistribute student fees. These bills were the most anticipated of the night.

Both Resolution 60 and Finance Bill 41 passed after much debate throughout the night.

The Act to Provide Support for Undocumented Students and Students that are Participants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program, or Resolution 60, illustrated Student Senate’s support of DACA and undocumented students and encouraged university administration to show their support for undocumented and DACA students through a number of ways.

The resolution, in describing its necessity, explained that with the recent presidential election, many uncertainties have risen regarding the fate of undocumented and DACA college students.

“The proposed changes in immigration policy by the incoming Presidential administration, specifically the elimination of DACA, leave undocumented and DACA students particularly vulnerable,” the resolution read. “The uncertainty that undocumented and DACA students live in threatens the integrity of the learning environment at NC State.”

Before debate, there was an open comment section where many non-senators spoke their opinions on the resolution.

“Members of your family are scared,” said Didier Turcios, a junior studying statistics and president of Mi Familia. Turcios referenced the togetherness students of NC State should demonstrate as members of the Wolfpack.

Not every community member was in favor of the resolution, however. Eric Low, a freshman studying life sciences, expressed his disapproval of the bill, citing that the resolution was illegal regarding U.S. law.

“Just because you’ve been elected by the students of NC State doesn’t mean you have the right to override those who are elected by citizens of the United States,” Low said.

During the allotted time for the report of Student Government adviser Laura Stott, Stott yielded her time to two adult members of the community.

“I’m asking you not to fast track this bill,” said Justine Hollingshead, director of DASA explaining that Student Senate should approach this situation with more tact and understanding. “There is going to be a time, but there is danger to moving forward at a quick pace.”

Hollingshead was joined by Reggie Barnes, the senior director of campus community centers, who agreed with Hollingshead for the most part, adding that moving into passing this resolution too fast could potentially harm undocumented students.

This hearing was certainly bumpy, with some heated debate occurring between two corresponding senators on the bill and Hollingshead. Senators Alex Obiol, a freshman studying engineering, and Belton Moore, a freshman studying management, insisted that they had spoken with member of the affected undocumented student community and had taken the necessary steps to ensure members of that community were in agreement with the passing of this bill. 

Interspersed with debate between senators, a few members of the community, including a few undocumented students, described their experiences and urged the Student Senate to pass the resolution.

After debate, which lasted much of the meeting, the resolution ultimately passed with only four senators voting against it. 

The other main bill of the night, Finance Bill 41, after a long period of pro and con debate, was passed on second reading.

Finance Bill 41 aimed to take funding away from Student Government and appropriating it to other student clubs and organizations on campus.

Matthew Yanik, a graduate student studying physiology and poultry science and corresponding senator on the bill, explained that the bill was created to address the belief Student Government was taking too many student fees for itself and not giving enough to those clubs and organizations that need more money. 

The bill in its original form, read that the appropriation for the Student Government banquet at the end of the session be reduced from $1,250 to $625. A resolution was proposed and passed that omitted this section from the bill.

Coleman Simpson, a sophomore studying agricultural education and senator representing the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, while discussing this amendment, explained that many of the funds appropriated to Student Government are well-deserved, going so far as citing how other universities pay student senators.

“We don’t have to have a gala, but a banquet would be nice,” Simpson said. 

Yanik disagreed, keeping to his argument that student government should be more frugal when planning events for themselves.

“We can have an appropriate celebration without spending $1,250,” Yanik said.

Daniel Harper, citing the low amount of money that Student Senate already gets, argued against the bill during an amendment debate. Harper referenced the difference in line item funding that the student body president gets and the funding the Student Senate president receives.

“[Student Body President Paul Nolan] has a line item of over $8,000 and Student Senate President Jamie Plummer] has a line-item of $1,000,” Harper said.