Student Assembly

Cornell University Student Assembly
January 31, 2008
4:45 — 6:30 P.M.
Memorial Room, Willard Straight Hall

I. Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 4:45 p.m.

II. Roll Call

Present: Mazdak Asgary, Chris Basil, Mark Coombs, Asa Craig, Samantha Dong, Adam Gay, Elan Greenberg, Vincent Hartman, Ryan Lavin, Ian Lesyk, Ashley McGovern, Carly Miller, Arjun Natarajan, Lance Polivy, Ahmed Salem, Rammy, Salem, Christopher Sarra, CJ Slicklen, Rebecca Stein, Sanjiv Tata, Andrew Wang

Excused: Rebecca Smith

III. Open Microphone

C. Slicklen asked if any members of the audience wished to speak about items not on the agenda.

Jacob Stein, 2009, said that there is nowhere to exchange cans for nickels on campus. He believes that students should be able to this. A lot of fraternities are wasteful and not a lot of people have cars to take cans to deposit locations in Ithaca. He said that his email address is jjs98 and asked the assembly to keep him updated on the issue.

A member of the audience gave a quick introduction to the Cornell Annual Fund. The fund is a nationally recognized initiative that many of Cornell’s peer institutions seek to emulate. The fund will be holding a phone-a-thon seeking donations. He asked interested assembly members to contact him. The phone-a-thon is a great way to increase student and alumni communications.

IV. Approval of the Minutes

Seeing that there were no minutes to approve, the chair moved on.

V. Announcements/Reports

UA Update

C. Basil said that the Cornell Store orders books late because the faculty is not encouraged to submit class lists early. The UA Cornell Advisory Committee would like to look into ways to encourage the faculty to turn in book lists as early as possible which would allow for a reduction in prices. The UA is also contemplating the possibility of instituting an honor code with the intention of changing the attitudes of Cornell students towards academic integrity. Provost Biddy Martin spoke at the UA meeting regarding the issue. She also faced a lot of faculty concern about the priorities of the master plan and the general decision making process. The opinions she voiced regarding the goals and agenda of the master plan were very prostudent. C. Basil said that he found her attitude reassuring.

S. Matthews added that the UA plans on bringing Provost Biddy Martin back to speak at a later meeting.

In response to a question posed by A. Craig regarding the honor code in relation to specific colleges, C. Basil said that the discussion of academic integrity and the institution of an honor code was very basic. A lot of different thoughts and opinions were expressed as to the direction that the initiative could take. He said that as it currently stands, there is not really a common ground among faculty and colleges relating to dealing with academic integrity.

K. Duch, student trustee, said that the issue of academic integrity and the implementation of an honor code may be discussed at the next Trustee meeting.

Ivy Council

S. Dong said that the Ivy Leadership Summit will be taking place at the University of Pennsylvania. The summit is a two day conference focused on the creation of leaders. She is proud to say that the keynote speaker is a Johnson School Professor. She asked SA members who have not confirmed their attendance to please do so.

Charter Test

G. Mazza said that he is beginning to work on a charter test. Anyone with ideas regarding the test can email him and he will work on incorporating those ideas. A draft test should be available at the next SA meeting.

M. Asgary said that he had worked on creating a Charter Test and that it is available in the Office of Assemblies.

There was a motion to move Resolution 13 to Business of the Day. It was seconded. There was no dissent. By a hand vote, Resolution 13 was moved to Business of the Day.

Additional Announcements

M. Asgary said that CIT has set up trial gmail accounts. About 4500 students currently have their emails forwarded to gmail. There will be a demonstration regarding the trial on Wednesday, February 6 if anyone is interested in attending.

VI. Business of the Day

Susan Murphy/Ken Hubbell Discussion

K. Hubbell said that he has been in the process of putting together a proposal based on an accumulated back log of incidences relating the to the university’s ability to communicate with parents regarding their children’s academic standing. An example of such an incidence is that a student has been attending Cornell for four years but only has two years of academic credit. Under current university policy, it is very difficult to communicate with parents. In the past there have been two tragic suicides that may have been preventable if the university was allowed to communicate with parents early on. He said that the proposal that he has worked on involves 4 points. The first involves notifying parents and guardians when students no longer are attending Cornell. The second involves relaxing policy regarding communication of academic information with parents of tax dependent children when warranted to be more consistent with peer institutions. The third involves obtaining emergency information to make it easier for the university to locate students about whom the administration is concerned. The forth involves early identification of nonattendance. All changes were proposed with the intention of keeping students safe. He said that the administration went forward with the proposal and has adjusted policy accordingly. The integration of the proposals does not significantly change policy and is similar to what was previously in place. As a general matter, the university treats its students as adults who are capable of making their own decisions regarding academic records. Policies related to the disclosure of academic information have been relaxed in a modest way in the interest of preserving the health and welfare of students in rather unique circumstances.

S. Murphy said that the Family Education Right to Privacy Act (FERPA) states that once students turn 18 or enters an institute of higher education they have responsibility for their records and that the university’s permission is needed to share this information with exceptions defined by the law. One of the defined exceptions permits one school official to discuss a student with another school official if there are concerns regarding that student. This type of discussion takes place on a need to know basis and can occur without the consent of the student. Another exception is relating to parents of dependent students as defined in the IRS code. Cornell has always by law had the ability to disclose academic information to parents but has had a policy of not doing so. The changes outlined by K. Hubbell are an example of Cornell exercising the aforementioned clause of FERPA. There is a clear statement online and in the course book that outlines Cornell’s policy of academic disclosure. The policy is also communicated by email. The university has not made it a policy to communicate student grades with parents. The only time that the university would communicate with parents regarding academic standing is when the administration feels that it is in the best interest of the student. The university has made it policy to communicate with the parents of dependent when students (1) voluntarily withdraw or have been required to withdraw, (2) when students are placed on warning, (3) when students academic standing is at issue, (4) when there is a disciplinary restriction or probation and (5) when there is an exceptional case where a student engages in behavior called into question regarding continued enrollment. The administration has proceeded in viewing students as dependant unless they otherwise indicate during registration. If students show they are independent none of the just mentioned policy changes would apply. The changes align Cornell with its peer institutions and the administration feels that most changes are minor.

A. Salem thanked S. Murphy and K. Hubbell for coming to the meeting. He said that the changes address the very important issue of student well being at Cornell and that it is very important for communication with parents to take place. He believes, speaking as an Arts and Sciences Representative, that within colleges, communication between the advising deans and students, is not a vibrant communication. In the past four years, he has never seen his dean or received a positive email from his dean. He said that he understands that deans are busy people but that the current discussion may be a good opportunity to discuss this issue of communication between deans and students.

K. Hubbell said that he is very sympathetic to the issue outlined by A. Salem. He said that his office has previously attempted to partner with the deans of different colleges to facilitate better communication. He said that communication is an issue that needs to be worked on.

S. Murphy said that A. Salem’s point is well taken. She encouraged Arts and Sciences representatives to talk with their deans or advising deans about the issue. The office of the Dean of Students will raise the issue but it is also important for students to do so.

A. Salem said that he has personally tried to communicate with the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences and he was told that the dean does not meet with students. He said it felt weird as a student to get this response. He asked S. Murphy or K. Hubbell to clarify the job of the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences.

S. Murphy said that she would look into the response that A. Salem received because it was somewhat surprising to her. She said that the role of the dean is to run the college, establish academic priorities, hire faculty, secure funding, provide a mechanism for student feedback and to determine that students are receiving the education that they deserve to receive. She said that if the dean has a policy of not meeting with students, he should at least be able to tell students where to go within his office.

In response to a question posed by A. Wang, S. Murphy said that the new policy went into effect beginning the Fall of 2007. In the past information was disclosed only when there were issues of student health and safety.

A. Wang said that he thinks that the policy change was a good idea. He asked S. Murphy or K. Hubbell to elaborate on the types of circumstances would warrant the release of academic information to parents.

K. Hubbell gave the example of a student who has told his parents that he is doing wonderfully but actually has been on academic probation and is not graduating on time. Prior to the change, he said that he would have to get a signed waiver from the student to speak to the parents about the truth. He said that he personally does not rush to disclose academic information to parents and views students as adults. The changes are not meant to interfere with students’ progress to adulthood. However, when such a discrepancy exists between what parents think and what the actual case is, it important that the university be able to exercise discretion in communicating with parents.

A. Wang confirmed that the policy change is solely related to the disclosure of academic information to parents. The policy change does not have anything to do with the disclosure of health records.

S. Murphy said that the university has tried to be fairly specific in defining what constitutes a case for academic disclosure.

M. Asgary said that as residence advisor he has been trained to identify students that may be struggling academically and to communicate up the line if necessary. He said that upperclassmen that live off campus have no one watching over them in such a way. He suggested that the administration look into providing mechanisms for identifying upperclassmen who may be struggling.

S. Murphy said that M. Asgary was absolutely right and that it is more difficult to identify students having difficulty when they live off campus. She mentioned that the university is working on outreach initiatives regarding how to identify students in need or distress. She said that it is important to remember that FERPA has nothing in it related to behavior.

K. Hubbell said that students have an enormous opportunity to contribute to the successful identification of students in need.

V. Hartman said that the fall of freshman year he made the Dean’s List and that the Dean’s List Certificate was mailed to his home address. He said that by mailing Dean’s List Certificates to students’ homes the university is in a way disclosing academic information to parents. From these mailings, parents can tell whether or not their children’s GPA qualifies them for the Dean’s List and whether or not their children’s grades have slipped. He asked if there was a way of looking into this issue.

S. Murphy said that V. Hartman had a good point and that she would look into it. She confirmed that V. Hartman was in the College of Arts and Sciences.

M. Coombs thanked S. Murphy and K. Hubbell for attending. He asked what precipitated the conversation now occurring between S. Murphy, K. Hubbell and the assembly.

C. Slicklen said that he asked S. Murphy and K. Hubbell to come and speak to the assembly. He asked them to come in response to a Wall Street Journal article that a number of representatives were forwarded. He said that he was not knowledgeable of the policy at the time and wanted to learn more about it.

K. Hubbell said that he had always intended to bring the proposed policy change regarding academic disclosure before the SA. The proposal however, took longer to craft than anticipated and he was unable to bring it into a public student forum until this point.

M. Coombs asked what caused the WSJ to write an article on the issue of disclosure of academic information to parents at Cornell.

S. Murphy said that there was a reporter doing a series of articles on the well being of students and privacy issues. In doing research, the reporter kept hearing of Cornell’s policy and began asking the administration questions. Cornell has really been a front runner in providing well being services to students.

M. Coombs confirmed that the article was positive and favored Cornell policies.

A. Craig asked K. Hubbell and S. Murphy to consider a situation in which a student is in academic distress but whose parents take no action to communicate with the university. He asked whether or not the administration would reach out to such a student’s parents.

K. Hubbell said that under the new policy the university could take the initiative to contact parents of students who are struggling academically. He said that he would only contact parents if he feels that they could be helpful in the situation. He will not contact parents if feels that they are not a part of the problem. He said that parents are often closest to their children and can help determine the best course of action for their child. He said that the tradition is to use undergraduate life as a time to grow up and that the policy is not seeking to thwart this process.

S. Murphy said that certain colleges did take the initiative this semester to contact parents of students who withdrew or were put on final warning.

G. Mazza asked what would happen in a situation where a student was seriously struggling academically but had a legitimate reason to keep the struggle from their parents.

S. Murphy said that if a dependent student was strongly against the disclosure of their academic information they should to talk to the registrar and the university could find some way to compromise.

C. Slicklen said that there was no one remaining on the speakers list. He thanked Vice President Murphy and Dean Hubbell for coming to the meeting.

Approval of the A&S and AAP Liaisons

C. Slicklen said that he has nominated Nikki Junewicz ‘10, and Haley Bergman ‘10, to be the new liaisons to A&S and AAP respectively. A majority vote is required to approve the new liaisons.

Seeing no speakers, R. Lavin motioned to call to question. A. Gay seconded the motion.

M. Asgary said he would like to hear the nominated liaisons introduce themselves.

R. Lavin withdrew his motion.

Haley Bergman introduced herself as a sophomore in the College of Architecture, Art and Planning. She is an Urban and Regional Studies major and very familiar with the issues going on in AAP. She has contacts in all three departments and feels that she can actively articulate the needs of all the departments.

Nikki Junewicz introduced herself as a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences. She said that she is undeclared but leaning towards history. She works as Tour Guide and is very aware of the issues on campus. She is also an Arts and Sciences Ambassador and as such has developed relationships with many people within the college.

A. Gay said that he feels that both candidates are phenomenal.

A. Gay motioned to vote. R. Lavin seconded the motion. There was no dissent. By a majority vote, the candidates were approved.

Approval of SAFC P&T Handbook Changes — Ian Lesyk and Jack Castle

In response to a question posed by M. Asgary, C. Slicklen said that the SAFC provided no supporting documentation and that they would be articulating the changes.

I. Lesyk said that online budgets are due Sunday, February 3 by midnight and it is therefore important to discuss the changes today.

J. Castle said that the SAFC currently funds two 1/8 page Daily Sun ads at a cap of $59.50 per ad. The ads are funded under the category of administrative expenses. He said that the cost of a 1/8 Sun advertisement has increased to $80. The SAFC would like to amend their policy to fund a maximum of two Daily Sun advertisements at a maximum of $120 total. This will allow student organizations to receive full funding for at least one advertisement and provide a subsidy for the other organization.

I. Lesyk clarified that if the change is accepted the first ad will be fully funded and the second ad will receive a 75% subsidy.

T. Mulherin said that the other issue that came up relates to funding transportation. Travel is currently funded at $0.15 per mile per 4 students. The SAFC is proposing that due to rising transportation costs, travel be funded at 50% of the current IRS standard rate. The current rate is $.505 which would amount to $0.2525 per mile per 4 students. If this change is implemented, the funding rate will accurately reflect fluctuating gas rates.

M. Asgary said that he felt that pegging the travel funding rate to the IRS standard rate was a good idea and a positive improvement. He asked if the representatives from the SAFC could elaborate of the implications of the policy. He asked how the change would influence the amount of money that the SAFC allocates.

J. Castle said that international student travel is capped at $1500 dollars so that the change will not alter the amount of money allocated to international travel. Travel is generally the most expensive cost for students and the change will really benefit groups.

M. Asgary’s time expired. There was a motion to extend the speakers time. It was seconded. There was no dissent. The speaker’s time was extended.

M. Asgary confirmed that two ads are currently funded at $59.50 per ad. He asked why the SAFC did not just fully fund the two ads at the increased price level for a total of $160.

T. Mulherin said that the SAFC is a subsidiary organization and does not have the goal of fully funding of an organization’s expenses. The change would fully fund one ad and subsidize the other by 75%. The commission feels that the change implements an appropriate funding level. Fully funding two ads for each organization would amount to a lot of money.

J. Castle said that Adminstrative Expenses are capped at $200.

In response to a question posed by M. Asgary, C. Slicklen said that amendments could be made to the proposals.

M. Asgary proposed that two Daily Sun advertisements be capped at $160 and that the Adminstrative Expenses cap be raised to $240 to accommodate the ad increase.

R. Lavin seconded the amendment. A. Gay dissented.

A. Gay said that the change proposed by M. Asgary represents a relatively large increase in funding levels. The amendment should at least be discussed.

C. Slicklen opened a speaker’s list to discuss the amendment.

A. Gay thanked the new SAFC co-chairs for attending the meeting and said that they have done a great job working with the SA thus far. He said he was glad that the assembly appeared to support the idea of tying the travel funding rate to the IRS rate. In regards to the amendment, there has been no research as to how such a large increase would affect the overall funding levels. The two changes today have been closely examined even though the SAFC does not have an exact quantifiable amount available. If the assembly supports the change regarding administrative funding then the amendment should at least be tabled so some research can be done.

J. Castle said that the amendment represents a large percentage change for administrative costs. Adminstrative funding covers items such as chalk and copying. If more funding goes towards these goods, funding would likely be taken away from other more valuable items. He noted that in the spring semester more money is traditionally requested and it is likely that all funds will be used up. Increasing the administrative cap could have a significant effect.

A. Wang asked if most organizations request funding for two Daily Sun Advertisements.

J. Castle said that most student organizations do request funding for two Daily Sun advertisements.

A. Wang said that he agrees with A. Gay and that more time is needed to determine the implications of raising the administrative funding cap.

C. Slicklen asked the SAFC to clarify the time constraints they were working under. He asked if it would feasible to table the approval of the proposed changes.

I. Lesyk said that final budgets are due before the next assembly meeting so it is not feasible to table the changes and have them be implemented this semester.

V. Hartman said that he agrees with A. Gay in that the amendment represents a much too dramatic change for the time period the assembly is working with. He said that he feels that it was inappropriate for the SAFC to present the changes without providing any sort of supporting documentation. The issue should be discussed but assembly members should be given an appropriate amount of time to do so.

J. Castle said that as policy stands right now each ad is being subsidized. The change would permit groups to receive full funding for at least one advertisement.

A. Salem asked if it was possible to push the budget application deadlines back a week.

T. Mulherin said that the deadline has been in place for a substantial time and that changing it would create massive chaos. Room reservations have been made and events have been planned in accordance with the deadline.

A. Salem said that as the President of an SAFC funded organization, he did not feel that there would be an adequate amount of time to notify organizations of the changes if they are passed today.

In response to a question posed by A. Salem, C. Slicklen confirmed that the SA could change the SAFC budget application deadline. It was more a question of whether or not the Office of Assemblies would be able to accommodate the change.

A. Epstein said that he does not feel that it is possible to push back the budget application deadlines by a week. Pushing the deadlines back would involve rescheduling hundreds of student volunteer hours and reshuffling the office. Additionally, a week later the assembly will be dealing with election packets.

A. McGovern emphasized that the proposed changes are not that drastic. She feels that the assembly should examine and resolve the issues so they can move on. She pointed out that since 75% of the second Daily Sun advertisement is subsidized, student organizations will only have to find $20 somewhere else. On the other hand an increase of funding by $20 to each group could have a much larger affect on the SAFC. She supports voting against the amendment.

R. Lavin reiterated that the assembly just heard that there is no feasible way to push back the deadline. It appears that doing so would create more problems for the student body and student organizations. He said that he feels that it would appropriate to allow the SAFC to do what they have to do.

R. Lavin called to question on the amendment. It was seconded. M. Asgary dissented. By a vote of 12 to 4, the assembly called to question on the amendment. By a vote of 2–14–1, the amendment failed.

A. Gay said that agrees with the two changes proposed by the SAFC co-chairs. They are small and rational changes. He encouraged all assembly members to vote in favor of approving the changes. Groups will be notified in time to take the changes into account. He said that one of the most pressing concerns for groups is the increase in travel costs. Most representatives’ constituents would be in favor of approving this change.

A. Gay motioned to approve the changes. R. Lavin seconded the motion. There were multiple dissents.

A. Salem said that there were many people on the speakers list. Although the changes are small, they should still be adequately addressed.

By a hand vote, the assembly did not call to question on the changes.

A. Wang confirmed that there was no limit on domestic travel. He said that he thought the changes were a good idea and encouraged assembly members to approve them. The SAFC co-chairs have spent substantial time examining these issues.

V. Hartman said he tends to be against travel. Increasing travel funding, even if it’s only by $0.10 per mile, could have drastic consequences.

V. Hartman motioned to amend the P&T Handbook to restrict travel to $500 per person per event.

C. Slicklen asked if V. Hartman would be open to discussing the amendment at a later date because the assembly has no documentation in front of them and it is not directly pertinent to the changes at hand.

V. Hartman said that he would be willing to discuss the amendment at a later date.

C. Slicklen thanked V. Hartman for being understanding.

M. Coombs said that documentation would help move discussion along. He also encouraged assembly members to not call to question if multiple people are on the speakers list. It is disrespectful to do so. Everyone should have the opportunity to speak. He said that he supports the changes but is concerned regarding A. Salem’s point regarding whether or not groups will have sufficient time to take the changes into account.

A. Salem said that the increase in travel funding may encourage groups to attend or host events that they might not have prepared for since travel is currently funded at a lesser rate. For groups to benefit from a change, they have to have sufficient time to take the changes into account. He would like to pass the changes at some time. He does not think that would be impossible to change the budget application deadline. The Office of Assemblies should accommodate the needs of the students and student organization.

A. Salem motioned to make an amendment to change the deadline of the SAFC budget application. It was not seconded. The amendment failed.

R. Lavin called to question. It was seconded. M. Asgary dissented.

M. Asgary said that he would like to ask a question about the gas mileage.

By a vote of 11–2−4, the assembly called to question.

I. Lesyk summarized the changes.

M. Asgary motioned to divide the question. V. Hartman seconded the motion. There were multiple dissents. The motion failed.

(*On February 14, 2008, it was noted that a motion to divide the question does not require a vote; that if it is moved and seconded, the question is automatically divided. The chair agreed that this procedure is correct and noted that it will be followed correctly in the future.*)

By a vote of 16–2−0, the SAFC P&T Handbook changes were approved.

M. Asgary said he thought that it was important for organizations presenting before the SA, especially the SAFC, to provide documentation to assembly members.

C. Slicklen said that there was a miscommunication between himself and I. Lesyk. Not having documentation regarding the changes was a mistake and will not happen again.

Elections Committee Report and Approval of the Spring 2008 Undergraduate Election Rules — M. Coombs

M. Coombs motioned to table the election rules indefinitely. There are no longer timing issues associated with the discussion of the rules. Also the assembly does not have the election packets in front of them and it is important to discussion Resolution 12 today.

No vote was taken since the sponsor pulled the resolution.

C. Slicklen encouraged M. Coombs to bring back the issue at an appropriate time.

V. Hartman motioned to move Resolution 13 to Business of the Day. It was seconded. There was no dissent.

Resolution 13 — Resolution in Support of Cornell’s New Financial Aid Policy - V. Hartman

V. Hartman said that, as announced in the Cornell Daily Sun, Cornell has changed their financial aid policy to reflect what has been happening at other universities. He felt that a sense of body resolution passed by the SA would be an appropriate response to show support of the new policy. Policies regarding financial aid affect all students and it is important to acknowledge the administration’s step forward.

Shawn Kong, a representative from the GPSA, said that he is also happy that the administration has taken steps to make financial aid more assessable to students. The policy will be instrumental in attracting new applicants to the university. He was very happy to hear the administration announce the policy change. He said that he is a sponsor of the resolution.

E. Greenberg said that he completely agrees with the resolution. There has been a lot of controversy regarding “keeping up with the Harvards.” The policy change is a small step in the right direction. He said that Biddy Martin wrote an article for the Chronicle of Higher Education sometime last year detailing why Cornell had not been able to fund financial aid at the same level as other institutions. He said that he would like to add himself as a sponsor to the resolution.

A. Gay asked if all representatives could add themselves as sponsors to the resolution.

C. Slicklen asked representatives wishing to cosponsor the resolution to raise their hands.

M. Asgary motioned to call to question. It was seconded. S. Dong dissented.

By a vote of 10–6−1, the motion did not pass.

V. Hartman said that Cornell has 1/5 the endowment of Harvard and is trying to propose a comparable financial aid plan. The action taken by the university today is a huge step forward. At the same time, much needs to be done with respect to foreign aid.

A. McGovern said that it might be wise for the assembly to look over the plan and see what is says. The sun article just came out today. The resolution, as V. Hartman admitted, was written very quickly. She thinks the assembly is being hasty and should further explore the issues and possible contingencies to the resolution.

S. Dong said that she is in support of the resolution. She said she would like to look into providing financial aid to international students and explore the option of incorporating that initiative into the resolution.

S. Dong motioned to table the resolution until the next meeting. It was seconded. V. Hartman dissented.

V. Hartman said that the change announced today was one of the biggest changes the history of Cornell Financial Aid. He said that it would important for students to recognize and commend the administration.

By a hand vote of 9–8, the resolution was tabled until next week.

VII. Unfinished Business

Resolution 7 — Transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) — Rammy Salem and Andrew Wang

R. Salem said that the resolution has been previously discussed and that he changed the resolution to take into account the opinions expressed by representatives at prior meetings. He added that the assembly will look forward to continuing dialogue regarding the program clarifying that the assembly does not support the initiative indefinitely.

M. Coombs motioned for unanimous consent. It was seconded. There was dissent. The motion failed.

M. Coombs clarified that A. Gay dissented. He yielded his time to A. Gay.

A. Gay said that he had a number of issues with the resolution and that setting up a personal rapid transit system in Ithaca may not necessarily be a good thing.

A. Salem motioned to call to question. It was seconded. There was no dissent.

R. Salem said that the GPSA passed a similar resolution and that the resolution shows conditional support for a good initiative.

By a roll call vote of 17–0−1, Resolution 7 passed.

M. Coombs motioned to extend the time of the meeting until 7 p.m. It was seconded. There was dissent. By a hand vote, the motion passed. The meeting was extended until 7 p.m.

Resolution 10 — Resolution Regarding Mann Library’s Decision Not to Choose Cornell Dining for the current “Manndibles” Location — Mazdak Asgary and Joshua Tabak

M. Asgary withdrew the resolution. The Dining Committee will update the assembly if there is any activity surrounding the acceptance of Bid Red Bucks at various eateries around campus.

VIII. New Business

Resolution 12 — Direct Election of the Student Assembly President and Executive Vice President — Mark Coombs and Vince Hartman

C. Slicklen said that since the resolution is a charter change, the discussion will be limited to questions only.

M. Coombs said that the resolution has to be discussed and voted on within two weeks to take effect.

V. Hartman quoted M. Coombs who said “That if we really in our heart of hearts want to see the SA change, then we have to be willing to change along with it.” The assembly’s biggest institutional flaw is how the president and executive vice president are elected. The assembly currently elects its president internally based on the assumption of what makes a good chair. The president is the spokesperson for the student body yet the student body has no idea who will be there president when they select candidates for office. The assembly has a duty to make these elections more democratic and more open showing support for the choice of the student body. As E. Greenberg said on November 29, the assembly needs more than good will and good intentions. It needs an institutional facelift. The direct election of the president and vice president is a necessary change.

E. Greenberg asked why the sponsors took a perfectly good idea and convoluted it by adding a superfluous whereas clause.

M. Coombs said he worded the whereas clause based on his discussion with individuals from the Sun. He wanted to represent that sentiment in the resolution.

V. Hartman and M. Coombs said that they would take E. Greenberg’s opinion to account and most likely reword the whereas clause.

A. Gay asked if the sponsors provide any recourse mechanism to the five or six best candidates that are running for president. If they are not elected president they may lose there seat on the SA causing the SA to lose some of its best representatives.

V. Hartman said that he feels that the threat of not being on the assembly will take elections to a whole other level.

A. Gay said he doesn’t understand V. Hartman’s point. Some of the best most qualified candidates will lose the election. How can these individuals take it to the next level if they are not even on the assembly?

V. Hartman said that there are no recourse mechanisms as is.

A. Gay asked if the sponsors have explored any other options. He suggested having the two highest vote getters be president and vice president.

A. Craig said that he is also concerned that highly qualified individuals will be prevented from serving on the SA in any capacity if they are not elected present. He feels that the assembly should further explore this issue. He asked if student from any class year could run for president.

M. Coombs said that anyone running for an at-large seat could run for president. He said that the reason that the sponsors did not choose to have the two highest vote getters fill the seats is because they may not wish to be an officer. It would be better to elect someone who wants the office rather than someone who is popular and receives a lot of votes.

G. Mazza asked how the sponsors planned on accounting for inexperienced or non-suitable people running for the office.

V. Hartman said that it is important for the assembly to trust their electorate. The assembly should trust that the student body can determine which candidates are qualified for officer positions.

G. Mazza asked if the sponsors had considered that the students select representatives and then entrusts them with the responsibility of electing assembly leadership.

M. Coombs said that different students value different qualities in candidates. He therefore thinks that the best judgment comes from the electorate itself.

In response to a question posed by G. Mazza, V. Hartman said that he did not consider the President of the SA an entry level position.

In response to a question posed by C. Basil, C. Slicklen confirmed that the resolution, if passed, would not affect the upcoming elections.

A. Gay said that from a financial standpoint, the assembly has already hired a company to handle online elections. Logistically it would not be possible to implement the changes of the resolution in the upcoming election.

C. Slicklen said that the issue of timing could be discussed further with the Office of Assemblies.

A. Wang asked the sponsors if they felt that the student body would support the direct election of the SA President and Executive Vice President.

M. Coombs said that there is a disconnect between the assembly and the student body. Passing the resolution would make students a greater part of the process. Direct elections will help students to feel more invested in the SA. If there is a big presidential election on campus participation in the election would increase. Continued discussion would increase as well as students held the president accountable to campaign promises.

A. Wang asked if M. Coombs thought experience was a necessary quality in a president.

M. Coombs said that different people value different qualities in leadership. It is his firm belief, as Director of Elections, that voter turnout would dramatically increase if the election of key officers was direct.

A. Salem asked the sponsors if they had considered making the VP of Finance an elected position as well. Especially in a byline funding year, the VP of Finance is one of the most important positions on the e-board.

M. Coombs said that the qualities valued in a President and Vice President are generally very different than those valued in the VP of Finance.

V. Hartman said that the assembly is vested with students’ money and the VP of Finance is the person who facilitates the allocation process.

A. McGovern asked why not make the entire e-board, excluding the VP of Internal Operations, directly elected.

M. Coombs said that the direct election of the President and Executive VP is large change and an appropriate step forward. It might be unwise to shake up the process too dramatically. Passing the resolution could act as a trial period with the direct election of other officers being considered in the future.

M. Asgary asked about the process of electing the VP of Internal Operations. He suggested a clarification of the wording in the resolution.

There was a motion to table the resolution. It was seconded. A. Craig dissented. By a hand vote, the motion failed.

A. Craig asked how the sponsors would feel about having a direct election for the President and Executive VP prior to the general elections. If this is done, then those who lose officer positions could run for general seats.

M. Coombs said that A. Craig’s idea was intriguing. However, individuals running for President who have lost could then have an advantage over those running for general seats in that they will have an extended campaign. The idea is something to look at.

A. Gay said that the assembly budgeted the same amount of money for elections in the next few years that they used this year. The budget would not allow for a second election in the next by-line funding cycle.

G. Mazza asked if M. Coombs had any direct data relating to the resulting increase in voter turnout. He also asked if M. Coombs had any data regarding the Student Trustee election which was arguable the most direct election on campus. He said that M. Coombs expressed that the VP of Finance should have experience. He feels that the President, who has direct communication with a number of administrators including the President of the University, should have some type of experience.

M. Coombs said that he has no concrete data. The only thing he has is his judgment as a student and assembly representative.

There was a motion to adjourn. It was seconded. There was no dissent. C. Slicklen adjourned the meeting at 6:57 p.m.

C. Slicklen said that the assembly had to go into executive session to elect a new chair of the environmental committee. The meeting was readjourned. The assembly went into executive session.

IX. Adjournment

There was a motion to adjourn. It was seconded. There was no dissent. C. Slicklen adjourned the meeting.

Respectfully submitted,
Liz Patrun