MINUTES
Graduate & Professional Student Assembly
GPSA Business Meeting
Monday, March 14th, 2011
Big Red Barn
5:30–7:00 P.M.

I. Welcome and Introductions

At 5:35 p.m., C. Mansfeldt called the meeting to order. This is the second to last business meeting of the official calendar. The main object of this meeting is to approve the charter.

Members Present: K. Albert, S. An, T. Balcerski, N. Baran, C. Clarke, E. Cortens, B. Gould, B. Hartshorn, C. Heckman, Y. Izrayelit, N. Little, C. Mansfeldt S. Harya, J. Swartz, M. Tootill, N. Yakubu

Members Absent: B. Heavner

Members Late: R. Adra

A. Sikora has given up her seat because she will not be able to attend the next few meetings so she won’t count toward quorum or voting membership.

Other non-voting members introduced themselves.

II. Announcements and Reports

a. Executive Updates

Executive Committee
Last week was trustee weekend. C. Mansfeldt had to give a report to trustees from the GPSA. He focused on committees and what happens after grad students pass their A-exams.

Communications Committee
J. Swartz said they had their monthly meeting last Wednesday. She’s going to be working with the SA and class councils on a Cornell Caring Community celebration to be held at the end of April.

Events Committee
N. Baran said the big thing they are getting ready for now is Grad Ball. They’re starting a marketing blitz tomorrow. She would like people to take some posters and hang them in your buildings. Committee members are doing this, too. The theme is Mad Men, early 60s glam. A lot of info will be on the website. Tickets will go on sale in Day Hall and the Big Red Barn. A request for volunteers will be sent out. Nicole thanked everyone for their petitions.

Appropriations Committee
K. Albert said they will be delaying presentation of FC revisions until the next meeting.

Survey Committee
E. Cortens thanked those who submitted feedback. They implemented what they can. The SRI did programming and saw a draft. There were some bugs but it is looking good.

III. Business of the Day

a. R.6: GPSA Bylaws and Charter Amendments (T. Balcerski)

T. Balcerski had a short presentation, then a formal presentation if desired. Then, there would be an informal debate period during which questions and amendments. Currently, they have 16 out of 18 members and have enough to pass.

T. Balcerski said there are three major types of changes. They want to review briefly the changes he’ll be presenting. Membership, procedural changes, committee changes. Reviewed his changes and explained the things which he specifically thought warranted more discussion.

There was no one spoken formally against the resolution so the formal portion of debate was closed. They moved into informal debate.

Y. Izrayelit asked where the meetings would be. T. Balcerski said that was a good question. It was not answered by these documents. But item four in the new bylaws specifically points out two things. The executive board is charged to formulate agenda. The meetings shall have business and discussion. This is the chance for you people to bring your vision. The exec board would decide.

B. Forster asked what Counsel is considered, as we’re not required to elect one. T. Balcerski said the problem is we have a position, which is so ambiguously defined, namely, if no one with exec experience, the counsel is vacant, and it’s not part of exec committee per se. B. Forster was worried that the way the language is written implies that we might have counsel. T. Balcerski said there have been years without counsel.

C. Clarke said that one minor, friendly amendments to the resolution. First resolved clause says be it further resolved, swap our further with therefore. Last whereas clause, no comma after efficiently. Also, change insure to ensure.

E. Cortens said the final whereas clause should end with a period. All the resolved clauses should be ended with periods. It may be worth mentioning that one thing not contained is giving the vote to all field representatives. This was floated, not in this document. Also not in here is a strict attendance requirement for field reps. The line in the funding guidelines saying the EVP shall notify the FC chair of the field rep position which has been absent for a sustained time period. If that’s ever happened, he doesn’t know, but it’s agreed on by the whole committee.

B. Gould said that something that came up in a breakout session is having meeting structures that you meet in breakout sessions before you vote on resolutions. After more questions, they moved to the amendments submitted in writing.

B. Heavner’s amendment was spoken on by C. Heckman spoke on behalf. Field members would vote on an executive that they wouldn’t be serving and the new voting members would vote for them. Doesn’t set up a good system with people voting for officers that they won’t have to serve with. Idea behind is to make sure there’s consistency in how officers are suggested.

C. Heckman proposed the amendment. It was seconded by N. Yakuba.

T. Balcerski wished to speak out against it. The committee voted how it did because part of the problem was that field reps felt disengaged. They felt membership should include certain opportunities, such as electing chairs and execs. They were wishing to avoid the dynamic that the field members just elected voting members and would be trusted to vote on officers.

C. Clarke said that the crux was that the gap could be quite large with two degrees of separation. They should have a say in how GPSA should go in the future.

E. Cortens motioned to move to informal debate. It was seconded by C. Heckman.

There was discussion on the philosophical differences between the resolution and the way the new charter was written. C. Heckman moved to close debate and call to question. It was seconded by E. Cortens.

By a vote of 2 — 13 — 2, the amendment does not pass and will not carry on to the resolution.

The second amendment was proposed by M. Hawkins. This was an issue that hasn’t been reconciled and was being hashed out for seven months. After 3–2 decision of charter review committee, he’s compelled to continue it. The charter review process provided a perfect opportunity to address the culturally diverse graduate school. One thing is clear, if we muffle this dialogue time and consign it to another group of people to decide, we’ve not only failed ourselves but our institution. We’ll create an even larger chasm than exists. If we pass this charter without this amendment, we’ll simply have an incomplete solution. He asked to pass for the betterment of GPSA.

T. Balcerski spoke in opposition. He doesn’t think it is an incomplete solution but an incomplete process. The charter isn’t a complete solution. He is less opposed to the spirit of the amendment, than to engaging, than the actual change.

There were questions for and against the resolution. They moved into informal debate where more questions were discussed.

C. Heckman moved to call to question the amendment. E. Cortens seconded.

By a vote of 5 — 10 — 2, the second amendment does not pass.

T. Balcerski motioned to extend the meeting to 7:15. There was a second by C. Heckman.

There were no other charter amendments. They then moved into the bylaw amendment proposed by B. Forster. B. Forster said that this just gives one person the job which is already being done. It would state that a committee member be charged with this task. C. Clarke seconded the amendment. T. Balcerski spoke in opposition, stating that this was already there.

E. Cortens motioned to move into informal debate. E. Cortens motioned to close debate and move to vote. B. Gould dissented.

B. Gould asked J. Swartz about her present committee and if it would be beneficial. E. Cortens said this was not redundant and doesn’t add a new responsibility. B. Gould said that the responsibility hasn’t been fulfilled in its entirety. E. Cortens said that he plans to vote towards it to insist upon material. It’s actually a way to improve the problem, to make sure they’re happening. J. Swartz said it would streamline the process. It would make it so the Communications and other committee chairs are aware of that. It would be more connected as opposed to disjointed.

E. Cortens motioned to close debate, S. An seconded.

By a vote of 11 — 3 — 3, the bylaw amendment passes.

N. Baran wanted to say that she thinks we’ve worked very hard and poured in a lot of effort and time. She thinks the spirit of the new charter is in more inclusiveness and better communication. She thanked people for their work.

There were more questions.

E. Cortens urged strongly to vote in favor. It has been an 18-month process. Diversity is a communications issue, not a structural issue. He wants to reach out to groups, to know we’re here and run for seats. When he came in there was one humanities rep and they made a real effort this year to do that.

There was a motion to vote on the charter from C. Clarke. It was seconded by Y. Izrayelit.

By a vote of 15 — 0 — 2, Resolution 6, the new bylaws and charter passed. It will be submitted to President Skorton to review.

C. Mansfeldt said this will not be the final debate on charter, just the final structured debate. He suggested people review it in the future, but don’t do this again.

E. Cortens motioned to adjourn. B. Hartshorn seconded.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:16 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Brittany Rosen