UA Codes and Judicial Committee

Codes and Judicial Committee, University Assembly
326 Kennedy Hall
December 11, 2012
3pm-4pm

Present: G. Mezey, A. Moore, P. Scelfo, A. Chan, R. Wayne

Also Present: A. Epstein, M. B. Grant, J. Hittelman, K. Zoner

G. Mezey called the meeting to order at 3:03pm.

G. Mezey asked those in attendance to introduce themselves.

G. Mezey proposed the committee will have biweekly meetings of approximately 45–60 minute duration during the Spring semester, beginning in the first week of February. Because the appointment of additional members is likely and several members’ schedules were not yet set, he will use Doodle or a similar polling tool to find a practical time for the first February meeting.

G. Mezey said that one of the committee’s functions is to recommend a slate of student and non-faculty staff candidates for appointment to the University Hearing and Review Boards (UHRB), the pool of volunteers from which Hearing and Review panels are convened to determine the outcomes of cases of alleged misconduct arising under the Campus Code of Conduct. The process will require all members to interview some of the candidates who apply to serve and to convene as a committee to determine which of those members will be interviewed.

M. B. Grant said that one of her unit, the Office of the Judicial Administrator, inclusion goals under the University’s “Towards New Destinations” initiative was to extend and expand UHRB recruitment and outreach.

M. B. Grant presented an overview of the Campus Code of Conduct process. She distributed a diagram of the process to assist members. In addition to details described in the diagram:

• 50–75% of cases each year are referred from the Cornell Police
• almost all cases involved an accused student, most misconduct by employees and faculty is handled by different processes for work-related misconduct
• unlike other institutions, factual determinations are made by the UHRB, not the JA
• 6–12 cases go to UHRB in the course of a year, including some that occur during the summer
• hearing process itself is modeled in many ways after a criminal proceeding
• besides JA and UHRB, code provides for Judicial Codes Counselor (JCC), a law student who provides advice to accused people
• a different process is provided for sexual harassment and assault:
  • under Code, such offenses are handled by a different process from other offenses
  • UA has approved a proposal that will handle such offenses under a process similar to that now provided for work-related misconduct, pending completion and approval of a new policy
  • UA will be consulted in the development and promulgation of that policy and likely will ask CJC for feedback
  • ultimately may result in modest reduction of number of cases going to UHRB
• JA and JCC appointments are subject to approval by the President and the UA on a two-year basis, and UA plays a role in selection of new occupants of these offices

K. Zoner suggested alternate timing might help. Committee members may have more availability to participate in recruitment efforts during the fall semester. Committee members could also benefit from starting planning and recruitment activities earlier relative to deadline for applications.

The following suggestions were made regarding the recruitment process:

• Information that should be addressed in the initial questionnaire or during interview process:
  • Availability for service (discuss time commitment and times when panels generally convene)
  • Availability for summer session service and selection of separate slate of temporary appointees to serve during summer session when primary pool is unavailable
  • Types of cases UHRB receive (uncomfortable subjects, violence, etc.)
  • Interview questions should be reviewed for pertinence and accompanied by instructions that advise interviewers how to use them
  • Consider providing a longer interview period than 20 minutes
• Compositional diversity:
  • Prelaw and law oriented students have disproportionately high representation in both applicant pool and UHRB membership
  • Nature of UHRB is particularly appealing to these communities, so they apply in significant numbers without outreach
  • Recruitment efforts should focus on broader outreach over a longer time to include other students and staff who would make a meaningful contribution but are less likely to become aware of the opportunity without active outreach
  • Engage constituent assemblies in publicity and outreach efforts
• Timing:
  • Process should start earlier
• Letter:
  • A letter used to be distributed describing responsibilities of UHRB materials. Such letter has not been distributed for at least four years.
  • An equivalent information item could be incorporated into the online application.

K. Zoner asked why she had not been included in the email notice regarding the meeting.

A. Epstein said that her membership formally expired in May, causing her to be removed from the private members mailing list. Since 2011, UA has eliminated the requirement that one of the employee seats be reserved for a member of the Cornell Police.

K. Zoner said Cornell Police representation was crucial since the majority of cases brought to the JA originate from that department. No notice was provided regarding the expiration of her term.

A. Epstein said he would investigate [and later found a configuration mistake had prevented notice from being sent for K. Zoner’s position and the Employee Assembly has since appointed K. Zoner to a vacant position in the committee]. The UA had generally eliminated the inclusion of ex-officio members in its standing committees. This measure was not intended to limit access, but rather to provide flexibility for individuals to self-associate with committees in whose business they need to engage.
A tool is provided for any member of the community, including former ex-officio members of the committee, to subscribe to receive notice of upcoming meetings, agendas, and other materials under consideration. The chair of the committee will post such materials to a mailing list called cjc-info@assembly.cornell.edu, which automatically includes current members of the committee but which any person can opt into by sending an email to cjc-info-subscribe@assembly.cornell.edu. This list had not been utilized for the present meeting because G. Mezey had not been informed of its availability and intended purpose in advance of the meeting. Normally, the chair would be acquainted with this tool through orientation earlier in the semester, but the chair of this committee was appointed to his positions after such orientation and thus not provided the opportunity to learn of this process in advance. The office will take steps to assure the current and future chairs are aware from the beginning of these tools availability regardless of when they are appointed.

Respectfully submitted,

Ari Epstein