Student Assembly

MINUTES
Cornell University Student Assembly
March 1, 2007
4:45 — 6:30 P.M.
Memorial Room, Willard Straight Hall

I. Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 4:48 p.m.

II. Roll Call

Present: Mazdak Asgary, Chris Basil, Sarah Boxer, Daniel Budish, Mark Coombs, David Crockett, Kate Duch, Maddie Ehrlich, Adam Gay, Elan Greenberg, Vincent Hartman, Ryan Lavin, Grace Leonard, Neal Nisargand, Ahmed Salem, Rammy Salem, Calvin Selth, CJ Slicklen, Kwame Thomison, Gene Weinstein

Excused: Shivaun Deena, Danielle Fernandes, Remy Roizen, Sarah Santana

Unexcused: Jose Gonzales, Roger Gousse

II. Open Microphone

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

No one came forward to speak.

IV. Approval of Minutes

The minutes from the February 22, 2007 Student Assembly meeting were not discussed.

V. Announcements/Reports

Student Aid Lobbying Trip Announcement— R. Lavin

R. Lavin said that he emailed all the representatives last week and is speaking today to remind them of the Student Aid Lobbying Trip. It is an annual trip organized by the administrators of the Office of Financial Aid. There is still space available. The trip will occur from Tuesday, March 27 to Wednesday March 28. He said that he and a number of other representatives will be attending. He encouraged SA members to participate. Representatives attending must respond to his e-mail the information he asked for. He asked that anyone with questions speak to him.

U.A. Update — K. Duch and A. Gay

A. Gay said that the first item addressed at the UA meeting were the committees of the University Assembly. The assembly is in the process of deciding which committees to keep and which to eliminate. The assembly will make its final determination next month.

C. Selth announced that the UA passed the HIV Resolution unanimously which is an important step in regards to bringing the resolution before the GPSA and the EA. He believes that the resolution should be brought before the faculty senate as well stating that it is very important to have unanimous support. Any representatives who wishes to become more involved with the resolution or has questions should speak to him.

C. Basil said that he presented the HIV Resolution at the February 26 GPSA meeting. A large number of representatives expressed their support for the idea.

K. Duch said that the Codes and Judicial Committee presented their draft of recommendations for the Campus Code of Conduct on Wednesday, February 28. The recommendations proposed in the draft were representative of the larger community’s response to the suggested changes. The CJC will issue a formal report the week of March 4. The UA will hold a special meeting on March 14 completely devoted to the Campus Code of Conduct. She said that any representative interested in attending should contact her. The UA will still hold its normal March meeting in addition to the meeting on the code of conduct.

K. Thomison asked if the CJC’s draft of recommendations was available online.

K. Duch said that the report was not available online because it is a draft and the CJC does not wish for it to be cited or published. The CJC will issue their formal report the week of March 4. The formal report will be available to the public.

Dining Committee Update — M. Asgary and M. Coombs

M. Coombs said that the dining committee met Monday, February 26 at Hughes Dining. The location and timing worked out very well. The committee had a very full agenda.

M. Asgary said that a main topic of discussion at the meeting was meal equivalencies. He had a long meeting devoted entirely to this topic with the dining administration. The dining administration provides Big Red Bucks in place of meal equivalencies. The Dining Director has agreed to write an in-depth column for the Daily Sun explaining the logic of the current system of Big Red Bucks. In the article she will direct students that have questions to herself and the dining administration. The Dining Committee also discussed bringing plastic bag recycling to the a la carte dining locations. He said that nutritional information for the a la carte dining stations should be available shortly. The dining committee is also hoping that the a la carte dining locations will provide information as to which of the food options are the healthiest similar to the way that Subway indicates the 7 subs under 6 grams of fat. The dining administration has also agreed to do a walk through of all the dining halls and the a la carte locations with the SA Dining Committee. Afterwards the representatives will be able to make recommendations about improving the system.

M. Coombs said that if anyone is interested in participating in the walk throughs, they are welcome to and should let him know.

M. Asgary said that the committee also discussed the quality of fruits in the all you care to eat dining halls and why bottled beverages are not available in Trillium. The administration has agreed to work on improving the quality of the fruit and resolved the beverages issue. They also discussed student management of dining locations.

M. Coombs said that Cornell has recently redone its contract with Pepsi. He said that he believes the university is in the first year of a seven-year contract. For the next six years, the contract is unchangeable. Anyone wishing to complain about the beverage situation should contact the Dining Services Administration Representative.

M. Asgary said that the administration agreed to look into extending the hours of Olin Caf�. The hours will potentially be extended to at least midnight or one, possibly two. He said that the building he lives in, Mews Hall, has a coffee vending machine. The administration has agreed to look into putting coffee vending machines that accept Big Red Bucks into other buildings on central campus.

S. Boxer asked what the difference was between all you can eat and all you care to eat dining halls.

M. Asgary said that all you can eat is a popular term. However, Campus Life believes that all you care to eat is seen as better terminology.

C. Slicklen asked if the Dining Committee could look into working with Statler Dining. He said that he has heard a lot of complaints about Mac’s Caf� not accepting Big Red Bucks after 2:30 p.m. and the Terrace closing after 2:00 p.m.

M. Asgary said that a discussion of the Mac’s issue has taken place. Since dining charges a 10% fee to cover administrative costs the administration tries to drive business to higher volume places. Dining does not actually own Mac’s or the Terrace so through they are trying to ensure that they make money at the dining locations they own.

M. Coombs said that a couple of years ago, there was a movement to bring the Temple of Zeus into the dining program. The dining administration approached the owners but they were uninterested. Bringing the Temple of Zeus into the dining program may lead to an increase in prices. The dining administration said that for them to reapproach the Temple of Zeus, there would need to be a large student based movement. He said that there is a Facebook group about the issue and that he contacted the administrator of the group. The administrator did not seem actively concerned.

M. Asgary asked that C. Slicklen attend the next Dining Committee meeting to speak about the issue so that the committee and the hotel school can work together to resolve the issue.

SAFC Announcement — M. Ehrlich

M. Ehrlich said that the appeals went very well. There are no final numbers available yet. She thought it was appropriate to tell the SA that the co-chairs of the executive board suspended a commissioner for questionable ethical conduct. She said that if anyone had questions regarding the suspension or the appeals, they should contact her.

Additional Announcments

S. Boxer said that the SA has appeals the week of March 4. She asked the representatives to please review the President and Treasurer’s Handbook and take the President and Treasurer’s Test. She said the docket for appeals is pretty full. The Appropriations Committee is meeting on Monday, March 5 and will be hearing three hours worth of appeals. She told the representatives to expect at least 5 or 6 appeals at the upcoming meeting.

C. Selth said that he was approached five or six times this week with students expressing serious concern about the elections. Although there is a full agenda today, he feels that it is very important that the assembly internally discuss the elections.

K. Thomison asked which aspect of the elections C. Selth would like to discuss.

C. Selth said primarily the number of candidates running.

K. Thomison said that President Skorton’s Forum took place Wednesday, February 28. He only saw five SA representatives at the forum which was somewhat disappointing. It was a nice intimate setting with about thirty students in attendance. Everyone really enjoyed it and President Skorton is planning to conduct another forum in April.

VI. Business of the Day

Students’ List Proposal, Presentation & Resolution [R.33] — K. Duch and Y. Mao

K. Duch said Y. Mao came to the assembly last semester and presented a rough idea of the Students’ List. The idea behind the students’ list is that it would act as an intermediary in accomplishing the long term goal of declassifying class evaluations. She said that there are a number of arguments that have arisen against class evaluations including random answering by students. She suggested that students do not take class evaluations seriously because they do not have access to the results. The random responses on the part of the students were the main claim that Y. Mao used to argue in favor of the Student’s List last semester and he developed the idea of the students’ list to prompt students to take course evaluations more seriously. The students’ list will provide students with additional information regarding professor performance and encourage professors to spend more time on undergraduate teaching as opposed to research. Y. Mao has been revising and improving this idea throughout this past semester. She presented the members of the assembly with a detailed plan, in their meeting materials packet, as to how the Students’ List Proposal will be implemented in the fall. At the end of every course evaluation there will be a question asking students if they nominate the teacher for a teaching award. At least 50% of a professor’s students for a particular course must respond and 90% of the students must answer yes for the professor to qualify. Additionally, those professors who receive 95% yes responses will qualify for the Distinguished Students’ List. There will be a committee to determine the recipients of Distinguished Students’ List award. She said that the idea of the Distinguished Students’ List was established because they thought it was unwise to give awards solely on quantitative data. The Distinguished Students’ List would include qualitative data such as recommendation letters and other feedback provided on course evaluation forms. She said that other prizes can be awarded based on other qualifications. For example, the Distinguished Young Teachers award given to professors who show significant progress in student evaluations or improve their teaching throughout a course. The faculty really supports progress in teaching and taking account there opinions is very important. The Students’ List will be announced at the end of the academic year where faculty will be recognized at a reception. No money will come from students’ to support the reception/awards. Faculty can qualify for the Students’ List every semester but for the Distinguished Students’ List priority will be given to those faculty who have not previously received it.

Y. Mao said that he believes the Students’ List provides a good naming opportunity. Endowment can be provided for the awards and alumni can be asked to donate.

M. Coombs said that he thinks the Students’ List is really good idea. He took a Chinese Mythology class last semester and was talking to the professor about the issue. He said that he found out that professors can uses rating from ratemyprofessor.com when applying for tenure. The Students’ List is a much more concrete and non-laughable rating system. It is Cornell based and individuals will know how the information is gathered.

D. Budish said that last semester the SA had an initiative for thebigredreview.com. He asked if this was going to be incorporated in any way.

Y. Mao said that he thinks that the bigredreview.com is a good thing. However the administration is not releasing the data. He will push very hard for them to begin to do so.

M. Asgary said that he thinks the Students’ List Proposal is a wonderful idea. He said that with the current percentage system it may be possible that only a few professors will be selected. He asked if the sponsors were willing to rethink the percentages if necessary.

K. Duch said that the resolution is a draft of the plan. The percentages are flexible and can be revised depending on the results of the evaluations. Information is not currently released and the main thing are trying to get at this point is the information.

There was a call for acclimation. It was seconded. The resolution passed unanimously.

R.34 Resolution Regarding Emergency Management Committee — M. Asgary and C. Slicklen

C. Slicklen said that this resolution is recommending a steering committee to the President so that students have organized input in emergency management crisis situations such as the snow day of February 14. On this day, there was a lot of confusion about whether or not classes were canceled and a good number of people were disheartened by the way the university handled the situation. It is the sponsors hope that the university forms a steering committee with student representation so that such a situation can be handled better in the future.

M. Asgary said that the decisions made in relation to the snow day did not take into account how the students were affected. The Vice President charged with making the final decision was not even in Ithaca.

C. Slicklen said that he and M. Asgary are also concerned with Cornell’s faculty and staff in addition to undergraduates and graduates. He said that he had a lab that day that was canceled. There was confusion regarding the protocol for making up a lab that is canceled due to snow. If there is student representation on a committee organized to deal with crisis situations such confusion will not arise and protocol can be defined.

M. Coombs said that he believes that the concept of a steering committee is a good idea. He said that be remembered seeing something in the Daily Sun after the snow day about a committee President Skorton created. He was however uncertain regarding the exact function of the committee.

Dean Hubbell clarified that President Skorton did in fact establish a committee.

M. Coombs asked if the committee that M. Asgary and C. Slicklen are proposing would be more proactive than the committee that President Skorton created whose function it is to look back on the Valentine’s Day snow day.

M. Asgary said that the committee created by President Skorton was charged with examining what had happened on February 14. The committee they are proposing is intended to deal with more than the February 14 and snow days in general. It is an emergency crisis management committee that takes into account all the constituencies.

C. Selth said that he appreciates the spirit of the resolution and believes that all constituencies should be involved in determining the protocol in such situations. A committee was made that discussed the unsafe conditions that employees were faced with because they had to stay late into the day. The night before the Valentine’s Day Blizzard he met with Susan Murphy who told him she was waiting up for a 3:00 A.M call. The decision to close the university would be made on this call. He is worried that this type of decision if not the type that should be made by a committee. Calling students, faculty and staff at three in the morning to determine whether or not to close the university does not seem effective or appropriate. He does believe that students should have input into when things close because students do have different concerns than the administration. However, he does not feel that calling a single student in the middle of the nigh to see what they think of the situation is an effective mode for gathering student input.

C. Slicklen agreed with the point made by C. Selth. The intention of the resolution is however to get students input, at an appropriate hour, regarding how to deal with such situations in the future. He hopes that the committee could develop guidelines specifying what conditions are acceptable for closing the university. The resolution is not trying to place the final decision to close the university in the hands of the students.

S. Boxer said that she thinks that the debate of this resolution is somewhat silly. There will be no more snow days this year and the Valentine’s Day snow day was the first one in six years. Decisions in such situations are made at 3:00 A.M. and they are administrative decisions. Although she agrees with the sentiment that students opinions should be taken into account they will often opt to not attend class. She said that the assembly needs to evaluate what types of resolutions they want to bring before the administration.

E. Greenberg disagrees with S. Boxer. The proposed committee takes into account all emergency crisis management situations and not just snow days. Sometimes decisions are not best left up to democracy and it would be a good idea to create an ad hoc committee of the SA to present their recommendations to the administration. There are individuals whose career it is to deal with emergency crisis management. He does not like the idea of random individuals from different communities coming together to make such important decisions.

C. Slicklen said that the experts in the recent snow day were uncertain as to how to communicate with the students. There was no uniform way of communicating the closure of the university with the students.

E. Greenberg said that President Skorton will see the resolution and ask what the proposed committee knows about emergency crisis management. If the sponsors want to focus on communication the resolution should be target the act of communication.

C. Slicklen said that students know the best way to notify people.

E. Greenberg believes that C. Slicklen’s point is valid. However the decision regarding how to notify people can be made in a short meeting. A committee is not needed.

R. Salem asked who would be on the committee if it were to be formed.

M. Asgary said that this resolution is a recommendation to the administration that students’ voices should be heard in crisis management situations. He mentioned that students were snowed in their dorms on the morning of the snow day and the administration needs to recognize and address this.

G. Weinstein said that he is not sure that the university handled the snow situation properly. It would be difficult for students to improve the situation because they just don’t know enough.

C. Slicklen said that the university was unclear regarding how to communicate with the students. The resolution is just a recommendation to university that they form a committee to address situations such as this.

There was a motion to call the previous question. It was seconded. There was dissent. There was a hand vote. Fourteen people were in favor of calling the previous question. One was not. The previous question was called.

M. Asgary and C. Slicklen withdrew their names from the resolution and said that that they will rework it taking into account the opinions presented by the representatives.

R. 35 Resolution Regarding Snow Removal — M. Asgary and A. Salem

A. Salem said that the resolution is pretty straight forward. Snow removal is a very important issue. Snow can obstruct even those individuals with full physical capabilities. It is even more detrimental to those students who are disabled. The administration needs to be certain that it is addressing the needs of disabled students.

M. Asgary said that many of the walkways on North and Central Campus were not cleared within 24 hours of the snowfall on February 14. These pathways are used by students to get to their classes and dorms and should have been cleared in a timely manner. There are still residence halls that do not have their fire exit pathways cleared which is in violation of the fire code. Through his limited contact with grounds department, he has come to understand that on campus buildings’ facilities people are only responsible for clearing the pathways around their buildings. The funding and the number of crew members for the Facilities Management Group have gone done while the numbers of pathways have increased. There are simply not enough staff members to plow all the walkways. Many walkways were not cleared for two days after the snow days whereas many other ones remained unplowed. This resolution is on business of the day because some pathways are still obstructed and the issue needs to be addressed by the administration before spring break.

S. Boxer said she was going to ask why the resolution was on business of the day. Even if the resolution passes the she is uncertain of the sponsors’ ability to go to grounds keeping and get the pathways cleared within the next day. She does however hope that it is possible. She asked if the sponsors have spoken with the grounds people and those in charge of plowing. She would like to know if they have been understaffed lately.

M. Asgary said that he has had limited contact with the grounds people. Their funding has been cut. When plowing pathways they designate high and low priority areas working down the ladder in determining which walkways to plow.

S. Boxer asked if they are planning on clearing all the walkways. She said she is unclear as the specific reason why the pathways were not cleared.

E. Greenberg said that grounds and facilities management does not expect to have three feet of snow every night. The university has a system in place to deal with snow removal. If snow accumulation becomes a hazard the university deals with it by canceling class. It would be unwise of the administration to allocate money to always have enough manpower available to plow away three feet of snow. Right now the issue that needs to be addressed is how to communicate the occurrence of a snow day with the students. When snow is falling at a rate of three to four inches per hour it is impossible to get enough manpower to clear all the walkways. He said that it is the career of the grounds people to deal with grounds management and it would be pompous and arrogant of the SA to tell them how to do their job.

A. Salem said that the grounds people are great people. It is the SA’s role to represent the students and it is in the interest of the students to have plowed pathways. If you don’t believe that it is important for the administration to work on clearing pathways, especially significant to disabled students, then you should vote against the resolution.

There was a motion to call the previous question. It was seconded. There was no dissent. The previous question was called.

A. Salem urged the representatives to pass this resolution. The resolution is important for him as well as a lot of other students. The resolution is just a recommendation and is an excellent way of representing students’ interests. Although the grounds keepers are professionals, the SA maintains the right to criticize them.

M. Asgary said that they realize that the grounds people know what they need to do. They just not have the means. The resolution is recommending the administration give them the means to do their job.

There was a roll call vote. By a vote of 6–10–1 abstention, the resolution failed.

VII. Unfinished Business

R. 24 Resolution Regarding Bulk E-mails — M. Coombs and C. Slicklen

M. Coombs said that the resolution now incorporates the Communications Committee and represents a revision to the charter.

K. Thomison said that the resolution cannot be voted on today because it is a charter change being discussed for the first time.

M. Coombs said that the only big changes are that any proposed e-mail will go the Communications Committee for review. The committee will have three days to look over the email. The Vice President of Public Relations will report back to the SA on the recommendation of the committee. The SA will then vote on the resolution. If the Communications Committee approves the e-mail a vote of 2/3 will be needed to overturn their recommendation and vice versa.

C. Slicklen said that he wanted to incorporate Communications Committee. The committee is currently only an advisory committee and he feels that it would be a good idea to give them something decision based to do. By allowing the Communications Committee to review e-mails, they are given more responsibility and are better able to incorporate their ideas into things. Also review by the committee gives more undergraduates a say in which e-mails will be sent out.

M. Coombs said that due to timing issues he was skeptical of adding the Communications Committee to the process of sending out bulk e-mails. However, C. Slicklen addressed the concerns regarding timing in the resolution. The committee will bend to the will of the person attempting to send the e-mail.

E. Greenberg said that he thinks adding the Communications Committee to the process is a positive change. He asked if VP Susan Murphy was willing to accept the resolution since she has the ultimate say in determining whether or not to send out bulk e-mails.

K. Thomison said that right now there is a system in place where any Cornell student must submit an e-mail to Susan Murphy before it can be sent out to the Cornell Community. All the resolution is doing is formalizing the process through which the SA will submit an e-mail to be sent out to the entire student body. There is really nothing for VP Murphy to approve in regards to this resolution.

M. Coombs said that VP Murphy makes the final decision regarding sending out an e-mail. If the assembly approves an e-mail, she can still say no. However, if she does she is opposing the demonstrated will of the Student Assembly. The burden would fall on her to explain why she chose not send out an e-mail approved by a representative student body.

E. Greenberg said that in the past the assembly has confronted some problems in sending out bulk e-mails. He has heard that VP Murphy is not very welcoming of them and was wondering if she would accept this resolution.

C. Slicklen said that the issue of sending out an e-mail to the university was addressed in the forum with President Skorton. He did not feel like there was an issue last semester when the assembly needed to send out an e-mail. This semester when sending out e-mails regarding the Spring Break Bus Program, the SA was able to work through any resistance.

K. Thomison suggested that the president of the SA should be exempt from the requirement of submitting an e-mail to the Communications Committee.

V. Hartman recommended a change in the wording. He thinks it would be better to make the resolution more in the notion of approving a bulk e-mail as opposed to getting an e-mail approved by VP of Student Services. He thinks that it should provide guidelines for sending out a bulk e-mail. Since the e-mail then needs approval from VP Murphy, the SA will have to go through her.

K. Thomison said that he thinks what the sponsors are trying to say is that any representative who wants to send an e-mail must first submit it to the Communications Committee. The fact that an administrator needs to be contacted before an SA representative sends an e-mail must be in the charter.

N. Nisargand said that he thinks what V. Hartman is saying is to make the rule of going to an administrator a general rule as opposed to just to VP Murphy. Sending bulk e-mails to different constituencies requires approval from different administrators.

There was a motion to end discussion. It was seconded. There was no dissent.

R. 28 Resolution Regarding Ex-Com Duties — M. Asgary, M. Coombs, R. Salem

R. Salem said that he took the considerations expressed by representatives last week into account. He said that he really looks up to a lot of the members on the assembly and wants to improve the communication between the executive committee and new student representatives. M. Asgary’s SA workshop is terrific but is just not enough.

M. Asgary agrees with R. Salem. He and R. Salem updated the bylaws. Last week representatives had said that the term meet was hazy so they clarified it to mean consulting with the primary purpose of mentoring. Meetings are required for the first term. They added a final clause to Article 7 of the charter so that the program can be evaluated in the future.

M. Coombs said that he feels that it is a good idea that the change allows for a degree of interpretation. This interpretation places faith in the executive committee and will allow them to determine the best course of action.

S. Boxer said that she was somewhat disappointed to see the resolution comeback very similar to the way it was presented last week. She believes the resolution is too vague and ambiguous. She does not think that it makes sense because of the time commitment it requires. She does support the spirit of the change.

M. Asgary asked S. Boxer if she had any specific changes she would like to see in the resolution.

S. Boxer said that she made very specific suggestions at the last meeting which included only requiring specific executive committee members to meet with new student representatives, to give each executive committee mentor a specific individual to mentor or to indicate if individuals should meet in groups.

C. Slicklen disagrees with S. Boxer. There is no excuse for why executive committee members cannot take the time to talk with new student representatives. The executive committee should be open to mentoring.

There was a motion to call the previous question. It was seconded. There was no dissent.

M. Coombs reiterated the point that the resolution takes into account both the needs of the new student representatives and the new student representatives. It allows both groups a degree of interpretation to determine the best course of action.

There was a roll call vote. The resolution passed with a vote of 15 yes to 2 abstentions.

VIII. New Business

No new business was discussed.

IX. Adjournment

The chair called the meeting into executive session.

The assembly went into executive session.

The meeting was adjourned.

Respectfully Submitted,
Liz Patrun
SA Clerk