UA Codes and Judicial Committee

Minutes of the March 7, 1997 Meeting

Persons Attending: Prof. David Delchamps, Faculty; Gregory Heibel, Graduate Student; Prof. Michael Kazarinoff, Faculty; Barbara Krause, Ex-Officio, Judicial Administrator; Kathleen Rourke, Staff, Chair; John Sherry, Ex-Officio, Faculty Senate Report.

Meeting Called to Order at 11.05 am.

Ms. Krause provided the University Assembly report. She reported that the Pepper Spray forum had been planned for Monday, March 10th. Officials of the Cornell University Police Department, Gannett Health Center, and CARE would be represented at the Forum.

Mr. Sherry reported that the University Assembly had addressed all CJC proposals to the Assembly, and would provide more detailed information as to their disposition at the next meeting.

Ms. Rourke reported that the Assemblies Office had requested that the Committee prepare its letters to prospective Hearing and Review Board members for the upcoming year. It was agreed that Mr. Delchamps would prepare the letters using last years’ as a pattern, and submit them to Ms. Rourke for her signature as Chair of the Committee. It was further agreed that the interview questions for this year would remain as used last year. In addition, it was agreed that the format selected by the Committee last year for interviews was effective, and would be used again this year. This includes 2 member interview teams (where feasible), a ranking system and a post-interview session in which all CJC members discussed the relative merits of each candidate. The only simple reorganization of the Code is not sufficient. In addition, Ms. Krause expressed concern that representations might be made to others that the draft as currently prepared is a finished draft. It was proposed that the University Counsel’s office might become involved in the drafting of the revision in a very preliminary manner to allow any Counsel’s concerns to be included early on.

Ms. Rourke agreed to send a copy of the working draft of the code to University Counsel’s office. She will also inqes for proposing the change. Committee members expressed concern over persons off campus being forced to return to campus to answer charges. In addition, members noted that the draft addressed the Committee’s concerns with possible jurisdiction being extended to alumni of the University. The matter was tabled until the next meeting due to a lack of a quorum.

Ms. Rourke reopened discussion of the potential revision of the Campus Code of Conduct. Ms. Rourke outlined the changes that had been made, which included a reorganization of the document to maintain continuity and keep general areas of the Code together. Ms. Rourke noted that there were limited textual changes in the document, and that Title III changes would be nearly impossible for various structural reasons, including State law and the necessity of Trustee action. Mr. Kazarinoff proposed the addition of a keyword index. Mr. Heibel proposed the creation of a separate digest version of the Code. Ms. Krause expressed significant concerns that a simple reorganization of the Code is not sufficient. In addition, Ms. Krause expressed concern that representations might be made to others that the draft as currently prepared is a finished draft. It was proposed that the University Counsel’s office might become involved in the drafting of the revision in a very preliminary manner to allow any Counsel’s concerns to be included early on.

Ms. Rourke agreed to send a copy of the working draft of the code to University Counsel’s office. She will also inquire if Counsel’s office would like to send a representative to our meetings in an ex officio capacity.