Student Assembly

Student Assembly Meeting Minutes
WSH: Memorial Room
4:45 p.m. — 6:00 p.m.
September 28, 2006

I. Call to order

M. Coombs (chairing the meeting) called the meeting to order at 4:46 p.m.

II. Roll Call

Present: Chris Basil, Carrie Bodner, Sarah Boxer, Daniel Budish, Mark Coombs, David Crockett, Shivaun Deena, Kate Duch, Maddie Ehrlich, Danielle Fernandes, Adam Gay, Roger Gousse, Elan Greenberg, Vincent C. Hartman, Ryan Lavin, Grace Leonard, Neal Nisargand, Rammy Salem, Sarah Santana, Calvin Selth, CJ Slicklen, Kwame Thomison, Rachel Goldfarb, Stacey Lynch, Mazdak Asgary

Excused: Ahmed Salem

Others Present: Ari Epstein

III. Oath of Office for New Members

Four newly elected SA members took the oath of office: David Crockett, Danielle Fernandes, Chris Basil, and Rammy Salem.

IV. Open Microphone

Austin Redmon (‘10) congratulated the newly elected representatives. He recommended that, in the future, the assembly make extra copies of the agenda and resolutions being considered for the day for audience members.

V. Approval of Minutes

There were no corrections to the minutes. There was a call for acclimation; it was seconded. There was no dissent. The minutes from the SA meeting on 9/21/06 were approved.

VI. Announcements/Reports

Fall Election Summary: C. Slicklen said they had a very successful election. 28% of the freshmen voted, an increase of about 7% from last year. Over 2000 freshmen votes were cast, and over 800 transfer votes were cast. He congratulated the new representatives and welcomed them.

Early Decision Discussion: E. Greenberg said he is planning to meet with the Dean of Admissions regarding the early decision debate going on. He hopes the SA can take an active role in this debate and solicit student opinions. Anyone interested in attending the meeting should contact him.

UA Update: K. Duch said the UA met yesterday. Their goals for the year are looking at the code of conduct and academic integrity; they also want to discuss initiating an honor code at Cornell. Princeton has an honor code, as does Cornell’s vet school. Charlie Walcott, Dean of Faculty, was at the meeting and encouraged the UA to take this issue on. They hope to have a meeting with President Skorton soon to discuss their goals. The UA is also looking at restructuring their charter to make their group more viable and useful. The UA wants to hold an undergrad and grad event, so anyone with suggestions should contact her. Finally, the UA committees are in the process of starting up in the next week or two. There will be another meeting October 25th.

PR Update: C. Slicklen announced that Homecoming will be free for undergraduate students; thanks to collaboration with Student Agencies, Class Councils and the Greek community. He thanked Jon Feldman for all of his work to achieve this. Also, he met with trustee Mao Ye last week to discuss some issues; they decided to get a petition started about declassified course evaluations. The dinner with trustee Mitarotonda will be cancelled because not enough members could meet with him during the scheduled time. The Cornell Chronicle would like to publish an SA update column, so they will be working on that. The next SA Guestroom column will be about Homecoming being free for undergrads. Finally, for homecoming, they are working on a fundraiser with United Way during the first half of the game. Anyone interested in working on that should contact him.

Operation Flood Recovery: N. Nisargand announced that Army ROTC will be facilitating reconstruction efforts in Binghamton following extensive flooding this summer. There will be an informational meeting on October 3, and the relief days are October 7th and 21st. It may be possible to coordinate for alternative dates as well. Anyone interested should contact him.

Liaison to Provost Update: C. Selth said he met with Biddy Martin last week. They alternate at each meeting: one meeting he briefs her on what the SA has done, the next meeting she gives him a report on what the administration is doing. During this meeting, he talked with her about athletics and the Darfur resolution. She is very pleased with the tone of more student engagement and the revitalization of the SA; she commended the assembly for their PR initiatives. She wants to discuss the resolution regarding the purview of the SA with the president and other senior administrators. She will issue a statement after their discussion, which representative Selth will forward to the assembly. He invited members to attend his next meeting with her; anyone interested should contact him.

Mayor of Ithaca Visit Announcement: S. Boxer reminded the assembly that Mayor of Ithaca Carolyn Peterson will be attending the assembly meeting on October 12. Members should start thinking about issues they’d like to bring up and initiatives they’re curious about. She recommended that everyone who wants to discuss something email it to her in advance.

Meeting before Fall Break M. Coombs said that next week’s meeting is right before fall break. Anyone planning to be gone should let Representative Greenberg know.

SAFC Update M. Ehrlich thanked everyone who came to SAFC hearings. She said they are very proud of how hard the commission has been working. She informed the assembly that the budgets for the semester have been allocated; there are also caps in place. Club sports’ budget caps continue to be an issue. She invited everyone to attend appeal hearings this Saturday from 10:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. in the International Lounge.

Into the Streets: D. Budish said he will no longer be able to head up the Into the Streets SA Team because he will be in New Orleans. He asked for a volunteer to take over this project.

C. Slicklen offered to lead the team.

VII. Business of the Day

Copyright Presentation:
Tracy Mitrano said the issue of digital copyrighting is a national issue that affects collegiate life in a unique way because of student life on campus. She said that this issue is probably one of the biggest issues of these students’ generation. This Tuesday, higher education was berated for not doing more to control copyright violations. In reality, Cornell and other institutions are doing more than commercial ISPs because they care about the citizenship and rights of students, as well as the university’s liability. The university, and specifically the Judicial Administrator’s office, does have a procedure for processing DMC notifications of potential violations and for processing violations. Many people think there will so on be legislation on the matter. One unlikely, extreme proposal is that universities be required to have the technology to block and track copyright violations. More likely, legislation will focus on how universities handle reporting copyright violations. Right now, they have no necessary legal liability to respond to the notices they receive. Here at Cornell, they have decided to respond to them because they feel it is important for students to learn about the law. Students also learn that this issue is larger than a simple violation; it is a major issue that affects students’ lives and should be taken on. When CU receives a DMC notice, they immediately block internet service to the individual concerned. They issue a cease and desist order and refer students to the JA. After they hear back from a student, the internet service is unblocked. Anyone who thinks they have observed a violation is required to report it to the JA. They have received about 400 DMC notices in the past 4 or 5 years.

Linda Falkson said that Tracy gets the original DMC notice, and then they notify the JA’s office. The JA’s office oversees and enforces the campus code of conduct and academic integrity as outlined in the policy notebook. Filesharing violations do come to the JA’s office. The JA notifies the accused student and then arranges a meeting with that student. At the meeting, they have a chance to explain their side and the JA explains that they are doing an investigation. The student has the same rights as they would under any other charge; for instance, they can bring an advisor, remain silent, or offer a witness. Filesharing violations tend not to be very complicated, and students usually admit to it. The JA’s office handles violations from an educational standpoint and has graduated sanctions that stress education, not punishment. For a first offense, they usually come to an agreement with students that includes some community service and a cease and desist order. They are starting a new program in January which will be a directed study in the place of a fine or community service for first time offenders. For a second offense, no fines are allowed and the agreement usually includes more community service and a written reprimand. For a third offense, there is a loss of internet privileges for a period of time and a period of probation.

C. Selth asked how many referrals are made to the JA each year for filesharing violations.

T. Mitrano didn’t have the exact numbers, but estimated there were a little over 200 referrals in 2003. The numbers were lower when Cornell had a campus-wide legal music service. This was probably true for two reasons. First, students were using the legal service. Second, the RIAA tends to be softer on institutions that support legal media services. Cornell is a leader in the issue of copyrighting; their numbers are very low compared to other universities. Cornell offers more educational programming and does more to enforce copyright rules. She encouraged the SA to look into bringing back a legal music service.

S. Santana asked if there would be a fee for the directed study, similar to basics.

T. Mitrano said there will be a fee involved to cover the time and educational programming. The fee is used just for cost recovery, not revenue.

L. Falkson said they try not to have fees whenever possible, but some programs still end up with a small cost. However, fees can be waived through an application process if necessary.

C. Slicklen mentioned the emails undergraduates have received lately about downloading policies. He asked what other advertising they do to get information out to students. He thinks a lot of people don’t realize how serious an issue this is. He suggested using the Guestroom column to spread the word.

T. Mitrano said she would love to see the SA take this on as one of their main issues for the year. Nothing about digital copyright laws is going to change unless it’s a grassroots movement. They have to organize political action to initiate change. She urged the assembly to educate students and to act as a role model for other institutions. This is a very big issue for this generation in particular. She offered to help the SA in any way possible; if there is an advertisement they want to do, she will lend her resources. This year’s freshman class had to take a test on authentication. They have tried to get the word out to students about the possibility of an investigation of subnets like DC++. They distributed fliers to all students in resident’s halls. They have advertised on public radio, in the Sun, with posters in the dorms. She asked the SA to tell her what else they can do and she’s behind them.

E. Greenberg said that, having gone through the process himself, he was impressed by how they handled copyright violations. He asked what ramifications these violations have for the future. Do the students’ names stay on file?

T. Mitrano said they have only had a subpoena for a name of an individual once. They’ve never released an individual’s name for a DMC notice. There was an effort to allow content owners to find out about identities of violators using a “fast track” method. There was a large group of opponent, including Verizon, who fought that action basing their argument on privacy issues. In reality, companies like Verizon also didn’t want to deal with the huge administrative costs and burdens such an action would have created. The case went to the DC Court of Appeals, where the ruling was that using a “fast track” method is not appropriate. As a result, more resources are being put into individual lawsuits. In the case of the one subpoena for a name involved with an individual suit, Cornell — which follows all laws — gave the name of the student.

L. Falkson pointed out that educational records do include disciplinary actions.

R. Salem asked how far Cornell is in the investigation of DC++.

T. Mitrano asked what investigation. It is solely the RIAA and MPAA that are concerned with investigating copyright infringement. Cornell does not initiate any investigations of that manner.

R. Salem said he was asking because it might be an effective tactic to make an example of one student using DC++, which would strike fear in people’s hearts.

T. Mitrano said she’d rather see the SA take the lead among peer institutions in addressing this political issue. Copyrighting is not a simple disciplinary problem and it is not best address through disciplinary action.

V. Hartman asked how long music copyrights last.

T. Mitrano said they last 95 years. That is exactly the sort of thing that needs to be addressed in this issue. The recording industry will put millions of dollars into protecting copyrights like that. If there is no grassroots movement against their efforts, it is possible that content owners can lock up entertainment and other information that might be more useful in other forms. It isn’t possible to make a stand against that with individual actions.

R. Lavin said it was great that she is asking them to take on this issue. He said he would bring this issue to Ivy Council for more discussion.

Appropriations Committee Decisions: S. Boxer said the committee chairs came before the Appropriations Committee for a hearing about their budget. After the hearing, the committee representative left the room and the Appropriations Committee took a vote on the budget. The Appropriations Committee is made of 6 SA members, 9 community members, and herself as the chair. The first budget is the Ivy Council budget. Representative Lavin will present the budget quickly, and then the SA will vote to uphold the Appropriations Committee’s decision.

R. Lavin said the budget includes a steering meeting in the fall and the spring. Steering meetings are for members of the Ivy Council e-board to get together and plan for the semester. The rest of the budget includes the Ivy Council conferences, meals, and transportation.

S. Boxer said the appropriation’s committee voted unanimously to approve the budget with one small mathematics error. The amount allocated to Ivy Council was $3,641.60. The SA must vote on this allocation; voting yes means you are approving the Appropriations Committee decision, voting no means the SA will nave to reallocate the budget right now.

There was a call for acclimation; it was seconded. There was no dissent. The Ivy Council budget was approved.

S. Boxer said the next budget is for the Communications Committee. The Appropriations Committee allocated $3,725 for the Communications Committee budget, which was about half their original request.

C. Slicklen said the Communications Committee had originally asked for $6,125; it was knocked down to $3,725. He would like to knock down that amount even further. The Appropriations Committee voted to get rid of one newsletter each semester; he thinks they should get rid of another one. He feels the additional newsletters are a waste of money. Getting rid of the additional two would be a savings of $800. They will also address this issue in a charter change resolution later in the meeting.

S. Boxer explained that if the SA votes not to uphold the Appropriations Committee’s decision, they can reallocate the Communications Committee budget, making the recommended changes.

S. Sanatana asked if the unused portion of committee budgets gets reverted to the SA budget.

S. Boxer said yes, but not until the end of the year. If the money is allocated now, it is frozen for the Communications Committee’s use until the end of this year.

S. Lynch asked why there is an asterix next to the fundraisers on the budget.

C. Slicklen replied that there had been some debate about using SA money for participation in fundraising events like Phi Tug and Tip-A-Canoe. He met with Representative Boxer to discuss this; they decided this was an appropriate use of SA funds.

There was a call to question. It was seconded. There was no dissent. A vote was taken via roll call. The SA overturned the Appropriations Committee decision with a vote of 17–0−3.
Chris Basil N
Carrie Bodner N
Sarah Boxer A
Daniel Budish N
Mark Coombs -
David Crockett N
Shivaun Deena N
Kate Duch N
Maddie Ehrlich N
Danielle Fernandes N
Adam Gay N
Roger Gousse N
Elan Greenberg A
Vincent V. Hartman A
Ryan Lavin N
Grace Leonard N
Neal Nisargand N
Ahmed Salem -
Rammy Salem N
Sarah Santana N
Calvin Selth N
CJ Slicklen N
Kwame Thomison -

C. Slicklen provided a new total for the Communications Committee budget: $2,690. This includes removing two more newsletters, meaning they would only publish one per semester (May and November) as a summary of what the SA had done. This new number also represents a decrease in funding for committee appreciation, a banner, and philanthropy shirts.

N. Nisargand asked if the newsletter is distributed by email, why it costs $400 per semester.

C. Slicklen said that the SA unfortunately does not have access to listserves at Cornell. The next best method of distribution, then, is in paper form at community centers. $400 represents a print newsletter once per semester.

There as a call to question to approve the budget of $2,690 for the Communications Committee budget. It was seconded. A vote was taken via roll call. The SA approved the new budget with a vote of 17–0−3.\\

Chris Basil Y
Carrie Bodner Y
Sarah Boxer A
Daniel Budish Y
Mark Coombs -
David Crockett Y
Shivaun Deena Y
Kate Duch Y
Maddie Ehrlich Y
Danielle Fernandes Y
Adam Gay Y
Roger Gousse Y
Elan Greenberg Y
Vincent V. Hartman A
Ryan Lavin Y
Grace Leonard Y
Neal Nisargand Y
Ahmed Salem -
Rammy Salem Y
Sarah Santana Y
Calvin Selth Y
CJ Slicklen Y
Kwame Thomison -

There was a motion to reconsider Resolution 1, which had originally been voted down, and add it to unfinished business on today’s agenda. It was seconded.

S. Boxer explained that Resolution 1 was a charter change amendment. Since not all the assembly seats were full at the time of the vote, the resolution had not received the required 2/3 vote of the entire body. The first time, the vote was 13–5 — not 2/3 of 23 members. They would like to reconsider the resolution in order for it to be voted on by the four new members. It needs to be voted on today in order to take effect in time for appeals if it is approved.

A vote was taken via hands. With unanimous approval, reconsideration of Resolution 1 was moved to unfinished business.

K. Thomison arrived and took over chairing the meeting.

S. Boxer said the SAFC manages a large portion of the SAF each year; they fund over 450 groups. The SA is the parent body of the SAFC; the SA is very active in the SAFC’s processes: Representative Ehrlich is a voting member of the SAFC executive board and Representative Boxer herself also participates. The SAFC is a very professionally run group with a detailed set of guidelines. Allocations came out last week. If groups feel there was some problem with their allocation, they have the option to appeal to the SAFC. If the SAFC denies their appeal, but the group is not satisfied, the group can appeal to the SA. The SA makes the final decision, but their vote is on whether or not the SAFC followed their rules or not (not on whether or not they think the group should get money). This resolution would make it mandatory for SA members to take the test that all presidents and treasurers of SAFC funded groups are required to take in order to apply. This would make sure that SA members were familiar with the SAFC’s guidelines, which is what they are voting on. It is an open book test on the computer, which takes about 20 minutes. It reviews the basic guidelines of the SAFC.

M. Ehrlich pointed out that it’s impossible to fail the test. You must correctly answer each question on one page before you’re allowed to move to the next page. It’s just a matter of sitting down and taking the test so members understand the rules of the SAFC.

S. Boxer said this charter change makes the Vice President of Finance responsible for making sure that everyone has taken the test by accessing the database that stores information about all the people who’ve taken the test. If an SA member hasn’t taken the test, they would not be allowed to vote on appeals. Members who haven’t taken the test would still be allowed to participate fully in discussion. She feels it isn’t appropriate to be voting on whether or not the SAFC followed its rules if the SA members don’t know what these rules are.

M. Ehrlich said that the SA is on a new, legitimate track this year. Making SA members accountable is an integral step in that track.

C. Slicklen asked if the authors were at all concerned that they’re handing SA members’ voting authority to nonvoting members. He asked where the database is and who has access.

S. Boxer said the database is complied by the Office of Assemblies and staff members - Ari Epstein and Terry Ector - the only people with access. The SAFC doesn’t even have access to the database.

C. Slicklen asked how the co-chairs know if presidents and treasurers took the test if they don’t have access to the database.

S. Boxer said that presidents and treasurers receive a statement of ethical conduct on completion of the budget, which they have to print out and hand in with their budget. Those printed copies are how the co-chairs know who has taken the test.

R. Salem asked if undergraduate groups applying for funding have to submit a detailed agenda of their events.

S. Boxer answered that it is a very formal process groups follow to apply for funding. They submit very detailed budgets which are evaluated with a very regulated process.

M. Ehrlich said that groups are required to turn in very exact documentation of events including things like price quotes and Mapquest mileage.

S. Boxer said the reason that it’s such a big deal if groups feel like they should have gotten funding, but were denied is because they only have one chance per semester to apply for funding.

A. Gay said he’s taken the test; it’s very easy. It makes sense that they should all take it. However, he has a major concern with one aspect of the resolution. It is the duty of each SA member to vote, so it is a disservice to your constituents if you aren’t able to vote because of a technicality. All members should take it upon themselves to be knowledgeable.

M. Coombs said in the US Congress, even ignorant congressmen are guaranteed a vote. The honorable thing to do if you don’t have all the information is to abstain, but that is a personal responsibility. He doesn’t like the idea of removing power from the members.

R. Lavin said that as the parent organization of the SAFC, the SA has to hold up the same standards the commission does. He found the test very informative and got a lot out of it. More importantly, nobody will fail this test because it is impossible to fail.

S. Deena said that everyone who came to the budget hearings, they saw how meticulous and time-consuming it is to evaluate budgets. It’s only fair for the SA members to take the test and represent their constituents as well as possible. She urged them to vote in support of this amendment.

C. Slicklen said they were able to vote on the Appropriations Committee’s decisions without taking a test about the Appropriations Committee’s rules.

There was a call to question. It was seconded. There was no dissent. Community members were invited to speak before the vote.

M. Asgary said he doesn’t have a problem with the idea, just the way it’s been presented. SA members are representatives of their constituency; it is a constituency that could be just as ignorant because they aren’t all required to take the test. Also, for the SAFC database, the idea of resting the power to give assembly members a vote with the SAFC is biased and unfair. Also, since this is a charter change, it should hold up over time. The way it is presented here doesn’t allow for any change. The charter is a timeless document; this is not something that should be in the charter. It might be more appropriate to put this change in the standing rules

S. Boxer said that even if the president and treasurer’s test does change slightly, there is no reason why the SAFC bylaws, handbook, or format of the test would change to make this amendment invalid. The eligibility of the vote is the real point of what they are trying to do. All members could still participate in the discussion, but as someone who has gone through this process many times, it’s very difficult to do if someone doesn’t understand the SAFC policies. When students come before the SA and are very upset because they didn’t follow the rules correctly, they make emotional pleas to the assembly. It is unfair for the SA to overturn the SAFC’s decisions and step on their toes because the members don’t understand why the commission did what they did in the first place.

A vote was taken via roll call. By a vote of 11–7−1, the resolution failed.
Chris Basil Y
Carrie Bodner Y
Sarah Boxer Y
Daniel Budish -
Mark Coombs N
David Crockett A
Shivaun Deena Y
Kate Duch N
Maddie Ehrlich Y
Danielle Fernandes Y
Adam Gay N
Roger Gousse Y
Elan Greenberg Y
Vincent V. Hartman N
Ryan Lavin Y
Grace Leonard Y
Neal Nisargand N
Ahmed Salem -
Rammy Salem Y
Sarah Santana N
Calvin Selth -
CJ Slicklen N
Kwame Thomison -

VIII. Unfinished Business

R. 11 Resolution Regarding SA Member Duties
R. 12 Resolution Regarding Academic Bill of Rights Referendum

IX. New Business

R. 13 Resolution Regarding SA Purview
R. 14 Resolution Regarding VP of PR Duties: C. Slicklen explained that the charter outlines 3 online newsletters per semester to the student body. He made a friendly amendment to R.14 changing the number to one newsletter per semester in print form (as discussed during their budget). This shouldn’t impact the SA’s ability to reach out because they have a number of other ways to communicate with people on campus such as the Guestroom column. Also, since the newsletter will have to be in print form, they won’t be able to reach as many students as they’d like anyway.

E. Greenberg asked if, even with these changes, the outreach of the SA will be at least equal to that of previous years.

C. Slicklen said yes, it will still be more outreach than previous years.

R. Goldfarb raised an environmental concern. She asked if they could consider printing the newsletter on recycled paper or including a note at the bottom telling students to recycle.

C. Slicklen agreed to consider that.

X. Adjournment

There was a motion to adjourn; it was seconded. There was no dissent. The meeting was adjourned at 6:16 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,
Lisa Gilbertson, SA Clerk
Office of Assemblies