Student Assembly

MINUTES
Cornell University Student Assembly
January 25, 2007
4:45 � 6:30 P.M.
Memorial Room, Willard Straight Hall

I. Call to Order

K. Thomison called the meeting to order at 4:51 p.m.

II. Roll Call

Present: Mazdak Asgary, Chris Basi, Sarah Boxer, Mark Coombs, David Crockett, Shivaun Deena, Kate Duch, Maddie Ehrlich, Danielle Fernandes, Adam Gay, Elan Greenberg, Vince Hartman, Ryan Lavin, Grace Leonard, Neal Nisargand, Ahmed Salem, Sarah Santana, Calvin Selth, CJ Slicklen, Kwame Thomison

Arrived Late: Daniel Budish, Roger Gousse

Absent: Stacey Lynch, Rammy Salem

Also Present: Ari Epstein, R. Roizen, J. Gonzalez

III. Induction Ceremony

Since a copy of the oath of office was unavailable, the chair moved on.

IV. Open Microphone

M. Coombs asked if any members of the community would like to speak.

No people came forward to speak.

V. Approval of Minutes

The chair moved on, seeing that there were no minutes to approve for this week.

VI. Announcements/Reports

Dining Committee Update � M. Coombs

M. Coombs said that the first dining committee meeting of the semester will be on Friday, January 26, 2007 at 5:00 p.m. in Oakenshields. Since meeting on Fridays has become problematic, the committee will be adjusting the schedule at the meeting. Anyone who is interested in seeing the committee get started for the semester should attend.

R. Lavin announced his resignation from the post of Head Delegate to the Ivy Council. He said that he has taken on new commitments this semester and as a result feels that he would not be able to adequately fulfill the delegate responsibilities. The Annual Ivy Council Leadership Summit is occurring on Friday, February 2, 2007. The head delegate must attend. R. Lavin encouraged all others interested in the Ivy Council to attend as well.

K. Thomison said that the assembly will enter executive session after meeting to decide who Cornell’s new Ivy Council delegate will be.

K. Thomison welcomed J. Gonzalez as the new liaison and R. Roizen as a new representative.

VII. Unfinished Business

R. 19 Resolution Regarding Olin & Uris Libraries � M. Coombs

M. Coombs said that he is still in the process of working to address concerns regarding statistics. The actual surveys have been completed. He said that he will be meeting with Anne Kinney on Friday, February 2 to discuss cost analysis and survey results. The GPSA is interested in the outcome of this meeting. There will be no new information regarding this resolution until after the meeting with Anne Kinney.

M. Coombs said that the survey was done through the national library system as opposed to through the SA. He will work out the specifics regarding the results of the surveys during the meeting with Anne Kinney and will bring back the information to the SA.

D. Budish asked if there were any numbers available pertaining to the cost analysis.

M. Coombs said that there were no numbers available today. He knows that Anne Kinney is looking into it though.

D. Budish asked where the money would be coming from expressing concern that it could be taken away from some other initiative.

M. Coombs said that where the money would be coming from will be discussed at the February 2 meeting and that he will bring back the information. If there is a possibility of the money being taken away from another initiative, he will be sure to let the assembly know.

There was a motion to table the solution until next Thursday. There was no dissent. The motion passed.

VII. New Business

R. 22 Resolution Regarding SA & UA Election Rules � M. Coombs, E. Greenberg, and V. Hartman

V. Hartman said that the intention of the resolution is to propose new SA and UA election rules that would be applicable in the upcoming election and following elections. There are three major changes: (1) None of the promotional material provided by the Office of Assemblies shall contain other candidates’ names, a common ticket name, or a shared slogan, (2) candidate statements may not include campus political organizations, other candidates’ names, a common ticket name, or a shared slogan and (3) candidates shall not share costs with other candidates “Shared costs” shall include promotional material that contains other candidates’ names, a common ticket name, or a shared slogan). In past elections candidates were allowed to share 50% of their finances with other candidates.

M. Coombs said that candidates would still be allowed to work together but they would all be required to have their own materials. This resolution does not prohibit people from campaigning together. M. Coombs then quoted George Washington’s Farwell Address. M. Coombs said that we cannot let a spirit of vindictiveness override what is best for this community like it has done so in the past. Individual candidates must think about their potential roles on the assembly and how that role will enable them to better the Cornell community.

In the past, there has been a tendency for candidates to just share each others handouts rather than focus in on their individual goals. The resolution is attempting to focus candidates on their individual and attainable goals. By focusing on goals, the student body will have more of a respect for the SA. Independent candidates have more of a chance if elections were to be run this way.

S. Boxer asked if M. Coombs, E. Greenberg or V. Hartman had worked with any UA members on this resolution since they are affected by it.

M. Coombs said the resolution is based on general and historical logic. The director of elections was contacted and fully supports and endorses the proposed changers.

S. Boxer said that the UA needs to be better incorporated.

K. Thomison said that all departments affected by the resolution must be contacted before the SA can vote.

M. Erlich asked how candidates who share slogans and those who share differently worded but extremely similar aims can be distinguished.

E. Greenberg said that the resolution forces the candidates to think about what points they are making as opposed to copying and pasting the points of other candidates which had been done in the past. These types of practices make it very difficult for independent candidates to run successfully.

M. Coombs said that the intent of the resolution is make candidates more accountable for what they promise to do. When people choose to run, they must run their own campaign.

V. Hartman asked what M. Erlich’s definition of a ticket is.

M. Erlich states that her definition of a ticket is candidates using the same mottos, key words and key ideas.

M. Coombs said that shared tickets lead to an inability to adequately annunciate goals because candidates are able to point voters in direction of another individual on the ticket.

A. Gay asked if V. Harman, M. Coombs and E. Greenberg would be willing to clarify wording. He agrees with the resolution. A. Gay asked what the outcome would be if candidates did not share a slogan but shared an idea. He pointed out that candidate could use the same fonts and same color quarter cards to associate themselves.

M. Coombs said that it is not possible to prevent political parties but that this resolution is a step in the right direction. He notes that people are cunning and will attempt to exploit the loopholes in the resolution.

V. Hartman said that in the original election rules campus political organization were not allowed to endorse candidates. What was added in this resolution was that candidates cannot endorse each other.

C. Selth supports the resolution. However, since students are intelligent and adaptable, he asked if V. Hartman, M. Coombs and E. Greenberg would be willing to make rules blocking cooperative campaigning.

E. Greenberg said that the resolution is trying to move toward campaign reform. He said that if there are changes that anyone wishes to make, they should contact himself, M. Coombs, or V. Hartman.

A. Salem said that he supports ideal of the resolution. He asked M. Coombs if he believed in the freedom of association.

M. Coombs said that he believed in the freedom of association.

A. Salem asked M. Coombs how he could reconcile this belief with the intention of the resolution.

M. Coombs said that the intent of the resolution is not to block freedom of association but rather to make individual candidates more accountable.

A. Salem asked how come it was permissible for a candidate to associate with a political organization on campus but not with another candidate.

E. Greenberg said that he would not respond to this question because it detracts from the point him, M. Coombs and V. Hartman are trying to make.

R. Lavin asked if the repercussions in terms of positions and constituencies have been thought about.

M. Coombs said that this resolution will level the playing field and place every on the same level.

V. Hartman said that tickets are allowed to be formed. The resolution only prevents shared finances.

R. Lavin asked if anyone had thought about how drastically different elections are from school to school.

V. Hartman mentioned two individuals who ran independently last year and lost.

S. Boxer said that she believes it would probably level off because there would be more candidates running for the ILR seats and less candidates running for the big seats. She asked what concretely the assembly would do when 5 candidates have the exact same bullet points. She said that all the loopholes need to be addressed.

M. Coombs said that the resolution is not meant to be a cure all. The resolution is a step in the right directions. There will always be loopholes.

E. Greenberg said that the loopholes need to be identified.

M. Erlich is concerned with the logic. She asked what the difference was between a shared slogan and extremely similar wording.

E. Greenberg believes that this is a loophole. He, M. Coombs and E. Greenberg will be soliciting the loopholes over the next week.

M. Erlich asked what the functional difference is between putting the same names on a ticket and the same ideas.

A. Salem asked if false campaign promises could be outlawed as opposed to tickets.

M. Coombs said that this resolution was originally was based on financial concerns. A. Salem’s concern is valid and could be potentially discussed in a separate resolution.

E. Greenberg believes that banning false campaign promises is not as forceful as the changes in the current resolution.

M. Asgary if people wanted to run together there is nothing preventing shared email or some other means that has no cost. By having no penalties, such methods could be tagged as minor violations that candidates can get away with. He said that the resolution should be made more concrete and penalties should be enforced. He also said that M. Coombs, V. Hartman, and E. Greenberg might not have the most updated set of rules.

C. Selth said that for next week there should be a coherent expression of sentiment or concrete suggestions for improvement. He was wondering if it was possible to coordinate a drafting session where interested SA members could discuss and improve the resolution informally.

E. Greenberg said absolutely.

There was a motion to end the discussion. There was no dissent. The motion passed.

R. 23 Resolution Regarding Spring Break Bus Program � V. Hartman

V. Hartman said that the intention of this resolution is to create a cheaper system for students to travel from Cornell to the Syracuse airport over spring break. Syracuse was chosen as the destination because for a first trial of this program a closer destination is preferable and multiple trips can be made. So far, he said that he has reserved two 41 passenger buses from for Friday, March 16 and Sunday, March 27. The schedule is outlined in the resolution but it can be changed. The next issue that V. Hartman discussed was that of selling the tickets. Creating a website is not a viable option because there are a number of difficulties in having students disclose their financial information online and the SA would have to put forward a substantial amount of money. V. Hartman said that he would like the Office of Assemblies to post the bus schedule on their website. He feels that the best way to sell the tickets would be through the Willard Straight Hall Ticket Office. The office charges and 8% commission fee but by using the office, the SA would not have to deal with selling tickets and manpower issues. The ticket office is convenient because it takes Cornell Card, credit card, check or cash which is beneficial to the students and the money will be directly transferred into SA’s account. If the SA chooses to use Cornell buses, the students would not be required to sign a waiver. If however, Shortline of Greyhound buses were used a wavier would be needed. The cost of the buses is fixed and dependent on mileage. The cost of 10 one way trips would be $2700. For every additional trip there would be an increase in the cost by $266. The intention is to have this program operate with no cost to the SA. The plan is to charge $15 for a one-way ticket and $25 for a round trip ticket. V. Hartman chose these prices because they are at an appropriate level of risk. To break even, 112 passengers would need to use the service. The SA can choose to change the prices but the prices in the resolution are at an appropriate level of risk. Additional passengers results in additional money to the SA. Ideally the SA does not want to have additional money. The Cornell buses do not have as much luggage space as the coach buses so 5 seats should left on each Cornell bus for luggage. Each bus would thus have 36 passengers on it. He said that the cost of advertisement would have to be included in the ticket cost. V. Hartman proposed that free methods of advertisement such as facebook, bulk e-mail, and a Daily Sun Article be utilized,

S. Boxer said that there should be an APSCOM meeting to discuss monetary concerns before the SA risks any money. She asked what happens if the SA makes a profit on this service.

V. Hartman said that if the SA makes a profit it would go back into a pool for the SA.

K. Thomison said that if we pass this resolution there must be an APSCOM meeting before the money goes anywhere. There is a possibility that the SA could lose money. On February 24, the assembly has the option of voting to terminate the program. The reason for this is because if enough students do not sign up at this point, the SA won’t lose money. This date allows students enough time to find another mode of transportation. The success, at this point, is dependent on advertising.

V. Hartman said that the buses cost nothing to reserve and that the assembly can cancel the reservations up until 24 hours in advance. If 112 passengers don’t utilize the service, then the SA will lose money.

K. Thomison said that the point of this resolution is to get this program in motion. By February 24 a meeting with APSCOM should be able to take place. Since the project is so big, everyone needs to know about it and the assembly needs to know as soon as possible if the program will be possible.

V. Hartman said that advertising needs to begin as soon as possible and that tickets need to be sold as soon as possible.

M. Erlich likes the idea. She said that if the assembly sells tickets with the possibility of canceling them, ticket sales would not be as high. However, the assembly would look bad if they canceled a number of tickets. She is also concerned with the image of the assembly if they make a profit and put the money back into a SA pool.

K. Thomison said that the idea was to put the money back into a pool that supports the bus program as opposed to just a pool for the SA. The profit will thus benefit students.

C. Slicklen asked what would happen if only one bus needed to be canceled and how far in advance the need for canceling one bus could be identified. He was wondering about the agreement that the SA makes with the students. He confirmed that the program was being advertised as a project of the SA and was wondering if the Communications Committee has been contacted about advertising.

V. Hartman said that the February 24 clause was added to resolution to allow the assembly to terminate the program if it was not popular enough. There should be no need to cancel a bus 48 hours in advance because the assembly is voting on the fate of the program on February 24. He said that he is on the communications committee.

K. Thomison said that while the assembly is advertising the program, they should make it known to the students that there is a possibility that the program will be canceled if not enough tickets are sold. This way students have an understanding of the situation and will be less inclined to blame the SA.

C. Selth said that bus tickets are different are different than train or plane tickets in the way that they are reserved. He asked what would happen if a students plane is late and the student missed the last SA bus.

V. Hartman said that the SA cannot be responsible for delayed flights and hopes that students would be responsible enough to select feasible bus times.

C. Selth said that it needs to be made clear that there are a limited number of rides leaving at specified times.

A. Salem believes that this is a great resolution. Determining exactly when flights arrive at the airport is difficult and it is thus hard for students to coordinate rides back to Cornell. This should be kept in mind.

R. Roizen said that students might be unwilling to make a commitment if they are aware there may be no ride for them if their flights are delayed.

K. Thomison said that people can take the SA bus service one way and then take the Ithaca Airport Limousine back from the airport to avoid problems resulting from delayed and canceled flights. The students would still end up saving money.

A. Gay believes that this is a great service and was wondering if V. Hartman had talked to anyone in Campus Life about whether they would be willing to guarantee a difference in funds to minimize the risk to the SA. Since this program is so beneficial to students and Campus Life has an interest in student well being, they might be willing.

V. Hartman said that he has not approached Campus Life. He has however, approached the transportation administration and they will be unable to put up the money. V. Hartman believes that the SA should enact the program independently to demonstrate the SA’s concern for students.

A. Gay believes that the SA bus program should be created and planned by the SA but backing is appropriate if needed.

V. Hartman said that the administration could be contacted after February 24 when the success of the program has been assessed.

M. Asgary mentioned that it cost him $180 for one way taxi from Syracuse to Cornell. The price of the SA bus service is so cheap in comparison that he feels there would not be a problem getting 112 students to use the program. He said that February 24 may be too early because people may not have completely figured out their plans. Students often book the Ithaca Airport Limousine only a week in advance. He does not think it would be a problem to cancel the SA buses a week in advance and that it would be a good idea to push back the date of the evaluation. He said that the SA is improving their image through this program even if it has to be canceled because it demonstrates their concern for the students.

V. Hartman said that if you raise the ticket price you lower the number of people required to break even. However, if the assembly raises the price students may feel cheated. He said that money cannot easily be refunded back to students if the assembly makes a profit. There must be a set price.

S. Deena asked if students would be able to purchase a ticket for the ride back to Cornell at the Syracuse Airport.

V. Hartman said that there will not be a trusted agent on the bus to collect the money. If the SA concludes that bus drivers can be trusted and if there are opens seats, selling tickets at the airport is a possibility.

S. Boxer said that the February 24 deadline is great. She does think that the Communications Committee needs to discuss this resolution as soon as possible.

The chair ended the debate and told the representative to send their questions, comments and concerns to V. Hartman. His email is vch6.

R. 25 Resolution Regarding Appendix B Guidelines for ALANA � S. Boxer

S. Boxer said that the mistake in the resolution will be corrected by next week. The numbers are not for debate. The resolution is about correcting a mistake.

K. Thomison said that this resolution will be voted on next week.

VIII.Adjournment

The chair called the meeting into executive session.

The assembly went into executive session at 6:45pm.

R. Roizen was sworn into office.

The assembly selected D. Budish to be Cornell’s head delegate to the Ivy Council.

The meeting was adjourned.

Respectfully Submitted,
Liz Patrun
SA Clerk