The room at 204 Witherspoon Center doesn’t look like much.

It’s just a bland space located down a long hall on the building’s second floor.

But here, throughout the hot, humid summer, 13 voting members and one advising member of the Constitution Revision Task Force sat around a large table attempting to influence the fate of the 25- to 30-year-old constitution that will affect every one of the over 30,000 students on campus.

But the question remains, whether all of the hours spent by the task force will actually matter in the eyes of the Student Senate.

The decision to begin the meetings during the summer inspired almost as much controversy as the topics discussed.

Some students felt that holding the task force meetings during the summer was controversial considering many of the key components were missing, including Student Chief Justice Lock Whiteside and Student Body Treasurer Adam Compton.

However, Tom Stafford, vice chancellor for Student Affairs, saw the timing differently.

He said he and Will Quick agree that they can still have a productive discussion with members missing. However, not everything will be finished by the end of the summer. The task force will still continue to hold discussions with members who were not present during the summer when they return in the fall, said Stafford.

Sen. Sam Saunders, a senior in business management, reflected on the summer setting as well.

“The constitution still has to go through Senate so everyone will get to discuss it openly this fall,” Saunders said. “The summer allowed us to see the willingness of the administration to support it.”

Will Quick, student body president, opened the first meeting with a list of major topics he planned to discuss during future meetings including part-time student eligibility in reference to voting and candidacy, due process punishment and student organization jurisdiction.

Throughout the summer, eligibility requirements and term limits occupied the minds of Constitution Revision Task Force members more often than any other topic presented at the initial gathering.

The place of part-time students in Student Government inspired strong opinions and heated debate. During the meetings, the task force tried to decipher whether part-time students fit the University regulation of “in good standing.”

Although there is no definition of “in good standing,” during the July 20 meeting, Stafford said the administration often interprets the term as progress toward a degree. This vague term contributed to an overall approval of excluding part-time students from Student Government officer positions throughout the discussions.

The task force voted nine to three late July in favor of only allowing “full-time degree seeking” students to run for government positions. This vote produced the first approved recommendation of the new constitution: Article 1 Section 2.

The group considered instituting a GPA requirement for all government officers of 2.5 or higher on July 6 but never reached a decision on the suggestion.

Term limits presented another major concern for the group.

Mycah Wilson, a senior in biomedical engineering, proposed a cutoff at 10 semesters and Tierza Watts, associate director for the Center for Student Leadership, Ethics, and Public Service, suggested a cutoff at three years during the July 6 meeting.

The task force failed to come to a conclusion on this issue as well.

Quick promoted the idea that the four student body elected positions should always be full-time, fee-paying and in-good-standing students.

Greg Doucette, proxy for Lock Whiteside and life-long education senator, introduced a bill he was planning on sponsoring in the Senate to the task force in their July 20 meeting.

The bill, titled the Apportionment Simplification Act, addresses the apportionment of senate seats.

The major revisions that the bill suggests include allocating two Senate seats to each individual college and allowing the remaining 38 seats to be occupied by each class based on percentage enrollment. The bill treats life-long education and part-time students as a college, allowing them two seats. If the bill is approved, the act will become effective for Spring General Elections.

Doucette commented that his bill seems to have accumulated support already.

“Everyone seems on board. However, there are a handful of people who are still leering,” Doucette said. “I want at least 20 supporters before the bill goes to Senate in September.”

Since the task force is not technically a part of the established procedure of revising the constitution, the fate of the group once the constitution recommendation goes to Senate is up in the air.

Quick said that the task force will be disbanded once the process is over. However, the group plans to stay semi-active and provide insight for the Senate whenever they need it.

He said that if the Senate decides not to accept the task force’s complete recommendation, they will probably accept some of the suggestions.

Quick also pointed out that the task force won’t fight any changes the Senate may make with a petition.

“Unless of course the Senate completely butchers it,” Quick said.