The Student Senate is violating “the spirit” of the Illinois Open Meetings Act by holding discussion through e-mail, said James Tidwell, The Daily Eastern News’ legal counsel.

Last week, the Student Senate tabled a motion that would give executive officers a flat compensation rate of $1,197 per year to be used toward any education-related expenses because senate members disagreed on the amount of compensation.

Since there was disagreement, senate members decided to continue discussing the issue via e-mail.

“It certainly violates the spirit of the law. There’s no question about that,” Tidwell said.

When the Illinois Open Meetings Act was written, no one ever thought of the possibility of e-mail and chatrooms, so whether discussion over e-mail is a violation of the Open Meetings Act is not specified in the law, Tidwell said.

However, he said the presumption of the law is that when the majority of a quorum of a public body discusses public business, that is a meeting. He compared e-mail to a conference call and said a conference call is considered a meeting, so the law would probably be extended to ongoing e-mail conversation.

Another complication in determining the legality of the issue is the difference between a chatroom and just e-mail. A chatroom is “real time” where all people are sending information over the Internet at the same time, which is like a real meeting, Tidwell said.

With sending an e-mail, everyone is not present at once, and they have the option of responding. But sending an e-mail from one person to another as opposed to a listserve is again another different situation, he said.

The Illinois Open Meetings Act assures that all questions and comments are done in public, so everyone can hear them. If people are e-mailing their comments and questions, they’re making public business private business, he said.

Upon asking to receive the e-mails, The Daily Eastern News also was included on the e-mail list.

Tidwell said by allowing The Daily Eastern News to receive the e-mails, senate members are trying to keep with the spirit of the law. However, there may be other people who also wish to hear the discussion.

“The Open Meetings Act is not just for the media, but all the student body,” he said.

“I understand why they are doing it,” Tidwell said. “(But) it’s not a good precedent. It’s a slippery slope.”

Adam Weyhaupt, speaker of the senate, declined comment on any violation.

This format for discussion hasn’t been used before, but Weyhaupt said he thinks the e-mail is working great despite the arguements.

“We haven’t used e-mail to debate an issue outside of a meeting,” he said.

“It’s a chance to talk and get our ideas out in a constructive fashion.”

He said if the discussion over e-mail were to happen at a meeting, the situation would be different. Through e-mail, it’s not wasting the time of all the members.

“If we can read this at our pace, I have no problem.”

Another senate member said the e-mail is a good way for everyone to be able to make their opinions known.

“It’s really effective,” said Corey Wilson, senate member. “It saves us a lot of time at the senate meeting.”

Yve Williams, senate member, said she is OK with the e-mails.

“It’s useful because it gives senators time before the meeting to do their homework or prepartation,” Williams said.

She said it is like preparing for a class. If students have homework, it is better to ask questions before the due date rather than the day of class.

On the other hand, the e-mail discussion has left some frustrated.

“I swear to goodness, if all this e-mailing has not solved anything,” said Nick Skipitaris, senate member, in an e-mail. “You guys better be ready to rock (at the meeting)… Is this helping everyone? Timeout. It’s like taking me forever to read all 9,000 e-mails.”

In one e-mail, Weyhaupt said: “I’ve tried to stay out of this as much as possible so far, but I think the discussion is no longer constructive. We need to settle on something.”

At another point in the e-mail discussion, Weyhaupt had to reprimand the senate members.

“You must not attack other people personally via this forum. This is for discussion of ideas and will not be used to attack other people,” Weyhaupt said. “I would not allow this in a meeting, and I do not appreciate it here.

The discussion over the e-mail has stirred some “political” issues with the upcoming Student Government elections.

“Yeah, I think I have seen some problems with (party lines), but I’ve dealt with it,” Weyhaupt said.

In one of her e-mails, Student Body President Katie Cox also recognized that party lines existed.

“Party lines need not be drawn in a senate meeting,” Cox said. “We all have the same purpose in that room. Make sure all of you are looking out for the students and not just yourselves … Don’t anyone look surprised. The lines have been obvious for weeks now.”

Weyhaupt said the party lines are not a problem for the senate. Every year at election time, people are more “zealous with the issues,” and he doesn’t think this year is any worse.

Cox said parties are not causing problems for the senate, but there is a tension.

“I’ve been on Student Government for two years now. I was in a party last year.” Cox said. “Parties are always more obvious around election time.”